H

Halloween (1978) (***1/2, horror) (D.-John Carpenter; Jamie Lee Curtis, Donald Pleasence, Nancy Loomis, P.J. Soles, Charles Cyphers, Kyle Richards) Classic low budget horror thriller. A truly evil psychopath escapes from an asylum to resume killing where he left off 15 Halloweens earlier. Style, real scares, and humor place this well above most of the countless ripoffs to follow. Exceptionally influential. Plot is the now hackneyed: unkillable psychotic relentlessly pursues the resourceful, and equally indestructible, scream machine. Curtis was first really noticed here for her vulnerability, believability and excellent lungs. Note the number of shots from the six-shot revolver and the California license plates on the Illinois cars. (12-11-95) Beginning

Halloween 2000 (10-30-00) It’s Halloween, you expected something else?

Utraviolet (1998) (****, vampire, horror) (10-30-00)

Vampires AKA Jim Carpenter’s Vampires (1998) (**1/2, horror) (10-30-00)

Bats (1999) (**, horror, sci fi) (10-30-00)

Hammett (1983) (**1/2, crime) (D.-Wim Wenders; Frederic Forrest, Peter Boyle, Marilu Henner, Elisha Cook, R.G. Armstrong, Richard Bradford, Roy Kinnear, Lydia Lei, Sylvia Sidney, Samuel Fuller, Royal Dano) Very attractive period film that I found visually interesting, but the plot never did anything for me. It just lacked excitement, tension, and a payoff. Fictional story about Dashiell Hammett (Forrest) who is hired by ex-Pinkerton buddy (Boyle) to look for a missing young Chinese prostitute. Dashiell Hammett fans will recognize many of the incidents as incorporated into his later books. (5-13-96) Beginning

Hang Em’ High (1967) (***, western) (11-19-01) (D.-Ted Post; Clint Eastwood, Inger Stevens, Ed Begley, Pat Hingle, Ben Johnson, Charles McGraw, Ruth White, Bruce Dern, Alan Hale Jr, Arlene Golonka, James Westerfield, Dennis Hopper, L. Q. Jones) A US attempt at a spaghetti Western after Eastwood’s tour as a man-with-no-name in Sergio Leone’s masterfully entertaining trilogy shot in Europe. Entertaining and well shot, but Hang Em’ doesn’t have the style of Leone’s films or the depth of story development to raise it to a classic, athough there are lovely roots for the more complex themes that would ultimately mature into the great Unforgiven. The film opens with a party of town respectables hunting the brutal murderer of their beloved neighbor. They find Eastwood with what seems likes incontrovertible evidence and dispatch efficient frontier justice; they hang him. They make two mistakes. They hang the wrong man, and they don’t kill him. Eastwood is retired Marshal Jedediah "Jed" Cooper who ends up working for hanging Territorial Judge Adam Fenton (Hingle), for whom rehabilitation is God’s job, not his. This job provides Jed a platform to wreal Old Testament justice.

The film certainly has an anti-capital punishment theme. However, it is not one sided. The judge genuinely believes in what he does, even when he finds it distasteful. Given the psychopathology of some of the low lifes (Dern comes promptly to mind) who sample his gallows, his actions may indeed be the only way to protect the innocent. Also what are reasonable punishments for the lynch party? The film offers no simple solutions, only ambiguous human nature. You get an interesting clash of personalities between Jed and the Judge as each tries to manage his own version of justice and manipulate the other. Unfortunately, the film is diluted with a needless and unnecessarily complicated romantic subplot, and the more profound issues are not developed well enough to make this a truly memorable film. Nevertheless, a well filmed, acted, taut film that demands discussion afterwards. Beginning

Hangmen Also Die (1943) (***, war, drama) (4-17-00) (D.-Fritz Lang; Brian Donlevy, Walter Brennan, Anna Lee, Gene Lockhart, Dennis O'Keefe) Taut, brutal drama of Nazi hunt for assassin of Henreich (The Hangman) in Czechlosovakia. One can really feel the tension as the Nazis bring increasingly draconian measures to bear and the noose tightens around the assassin. The plot is somewhat contrived, but the real human toll of the occupation is brought depressingly to life as is the enormous tension of those living under such conditions. Of course, Hangmen had a strong propaganda element, but it does work well into the plot. The final element with the traitor is handled cleverly with a few nifty twists. Beginning

Hannah Montana/Miley Cyrus: Best of Both Worlds Concert Tour 3D (2008) (**1/2 adults, **** children of the right age, rock concert, documentary) (2-6-08) (D.- Bruce Hendricks; Miley Cyrus as herself and Hannah Montana; Joe Jonas, Kevin Jonas, Nick Jonas as themselves) If you don’t know who Hanna Montana is, definitely skip this one. If you have tweenies or perhaps teenage girls that you want to ingratiate yourself to, take them to the 3D showing at the Carmike (limited engagement). Prices are not film, but not concert either at $18 with the 3D glasses. The movie is some backstage clips, but mainly a compilation of her tours. We took our 7 and 10 year old granddaughters to it and it was worth the money for their reactions. The younger one in particular is an avid Hanna Montana fan, although she was somewhat disappointed that it wasn’t more like her TV show. The older one on the other hand just enjoyed the show. The 3D effects are awesome. I told the girls afterwards that this was as close as they were going to get to a real rock concert for years, so they had better have enjoyed it. Actually in some ways it was better because you got many of the best parts and angles and locations that would not have been possible in real life. The 3D effects are awesome. Miley Cyrus, who plays herself and the TV show’s rock singer Hannah, is genuinely 16 years old. The Jonas brothers, the other featured act, really know how to work the crowds.

In summary if you have children interested in Hannah Montana, this is a good investment. If you are an adult, go to watch their reactions and the awesome 3D. There were a number of girls with Hanna Montana wigs—and one father, whose daughter wouldn’t get anywhere near him when he wore the wig. They have the 3D technology right this time, and while you get a few very in-your-face shots to demonstrate its power, the 3D is extraordinarily realistic. Since this is a concert and they have multiple cameras running, you also get to see the cameras. They aren’t really that big and not only is the 3D fantastic, but the image quality is also. To give you some idea of how good, in some of the concert scenes there were people waving their arms in front of the camera at the bottom of the screen. Both my daughter and I thought the first few times they were enthusiastic members of our own audience. At the end they fired cannons of confetti into the air, and it literally filled the movie theater. You could reach out and grab some!When the spot lights were cutting through the haze coming toward you, you could see the change in distance in a perfectly normal way. Disney is putting out the first digital live action movie this summer, Journey to the Center of the Earth with Brendan Fraser. The 3D previews left no doubt that we will go to see it. The 3D technology has arrived. Now all we have to do is see whether serious directors will embrace, adapt to, and exploit the technology in their films. And whether the audience will take the glasses. I wear glasses and had no trouble whatsoever. Beginning

Hard-Boiled (original title Lashou shentan) aka Hot-Handed God of Cops and Ruthless Super-Cop (1992) (***, action, crime) (D.-John Woo; Yun-Fat Chow, Tony Leung, Teresa Mo, Philip Chan, Anthony Wong) Hard-Boiled is Woo's last film in Hong Kong before pulling out in anticipation of the PRC takeover. It stars Yun-Fat Chow (of The Replacement Killers), who is one of Woo's favorite actors. R rated for ultraviolence and a body count approaching that of a small war. As with Woo's other films, don't go into it expecting plot. Style over substance. Lush production values, action sequences choreographed like Swan Lake at the Bolshoi. Extraordinary integration of sound, both musical and ambient, with the action. Beautiful use of imagery and slowed motion. As with other Woo films, the action sequences have to be seen to be believed; the motorcycle assault and the battle in the hospital come to mind. And the hospital! What a collection of slow moving targets! The film would be a real mind bender on the big screen.

Chow (Tequila) is a police officer trying to halt the Triad's gun running. Leung (Tony) is a gangster who appears to be playing both ends against the middle, which pits the two against each other. Both are excellent action figures as well as beautifully and sadly introspective. However, a film like this ultimately hinges on the quality of the villains. Woo never shorts his villain and here we have the ruthless psychotic boss Johnny (Wong) and his aptly named killing machine Mad Dog (Kwok). While Hard-Boiled is predominantly an action film, it does deal with matters of honor and loyalty.

While I didn't think that Hard-Boiled was as good as The Replacement Killers, which I considered a visual-aural roller coaster ride, I very much enjoyed it. Don't go into Hard-Boiled expecting Hamlet. It is a very good action film. Review based on the subtitled, letterboxed cable version. Do view the letterboxed version if you can get it. (9-14-98) Beginning

Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban (2004) (***1/2, fantasy) (10-12-04) (D.-Alfonso Cuaron; Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Gary Oldman, David Thewlis, Michael Gambon, Alan Rickman)For me the best of the three Potter films. The story line is more mature. Potter and his friends are now older and we can really see the beginning uncertainties and angst of teenage years superimposed on the super magical powers of the young wizards. Great powers would certainly not alleviate the pain of growing up. The cinematography is marvelous. The art direction under Cuaron is stark, dark, foreboding.

The story revolves around the escape of Sirius Black (Oldman) from Azkaban prison. Black was responsible for the death of Potter’s parents, and it seems likely he would now like to make a clean sweep of the family. To protect the students at Hogwart, Dementors are stationed at every corner. These creatures are your worst nightmare. Black, flowing, soul sucking. They are also not so easy to control and are not above taking down a few innocents in their search for Black.

The school is populated with the usual assortment of offbeat wizards, creatures, and atmosphere befitting a school of wizardry. Emma Thompson’s spaced out medium is a hoot. Modern special effects make the atmosphere. The whomping willow has a delightfully key part in the film.

The young actors are all coming into their own, and Hermione “that felt good” Granger (Watson) holds her own against Harry (Radcliffe).

I will give no more plot away, as I found much of the pleasure on first viewing coming from the plot development. It is a big screen film and I highly recommend seeing it in a theater.

As with the Bond movies, a pattern for the opening has emerged. Harry is insulted and abused mercilessly by the Muggles led by his insufferable guardians, until he lashes back with magic. The result is always deliciously satisfying.

Harry Potter And The Sorcerer's Stone (2001) (***1/2, fantasy) (3-18-02) (D- Chris Columbus; Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Robbie Coltrane, Matthew Lewis, Tom Felton, Richard Harris, Maggie Smith, Alan Rickman, Ian Hart, Nick: John Cleese) Based apparently extremely accurately on the novel by J.K. Rowling. Given the enormous following that Harry Potter has, and my not having read any of the books, I venture into dangerous territory here. The plot follows orphaned 11 year old Harry being plucked from his exploitive aunt and uncle, and his growth into a young sorcerer at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Sorcery. The film does do a stellar job of creating an alternative universe where wizardry is reality, unicorns exist, and little is impossible. The film is long at two and half hours, but it needs to be to give viewers such as myself the background, the characters, and the important little details such as how Quidditch is played. There is a lot here, but I think they do a good job of getting it across. The acting is good with the pivotal children holding their own against the seasoned adult cast. Radcliffe is Potter, a perfect portrayal from everything I can surmise. His newfound friends at Hogwarts are Hermione Granger (Watson) and Ron Weasley (Grint). Hermione is cute as a bug’s ear with her mass of curls and mischievous smile. She is also talented, adventurous, and a good friend of Harry in the best sense. Granger is clutzy, a mass of unrealized talents. He is also brave and resourceful. Their avowed enemy is the conniving, oily, rich kid Draco Malfoy (Felton).

This is not a light fairy tale. It is dark, brooding, rough, twisted, dangerous. This is not a world for small children who are likely to be frightened by the violence (stylized, but present) and imagery. In my opinion, the film is geared for the just preteen and early teenagers, which is the primary audience of the books. At this level, I suspect the film works perfectly. Given modern society and what children are exposed to, I also suspect the level of violence and terror is suitable.

We watched the film at the Jefferson. The film was very dark. Judging from other films, the video release will probably be lightened to improve viewing on TV. Also, I had some problem with the English accent, which makes some of the dialogue hard to understand.

As an aside Warner Brothers bought the movie rights to the book for less than a million dollars in 1997 before Americans realized the lure of Potter. Spielberg was the first choice of director once it became clear what a cash cow the film was going to be. He ultimately backed out because of other commitments and because he probably didn’t feel that he would have the creative control that he usually exercises; the decision was made that the film had to follow very closely the original novel.

I add that my wife read one of the later Potter books and felt that the actors did a fine job of capturing the characters. She felt right at home with them all. Beginning

Harvest, The (1995) (unrated, crime, drama) (D.-David Marconi; Miguel Ferrer, Henry Silva) Made for HBO. HBO has made some pretty respectable films. This is not one of them. I gave up after 75 out of 105 minutes, which accounts for the "unrated". Ferrer is a blocked hack writer who goes down to Mexico to research a story he wrote for a film, which he has been trying to refine to acceptable form for the past two years. When he gets there he discovers within minutes that reality bears no resemblance to what he has been writing thousands of miles away. He forgot the first rule of journalism: Have a few accurate facts before you write a documentary. A mysterious sexy blonde, a brutal police officer (Silva), and the unexpected removal of something very dear to him form the remainder of what I could watch. A potentially intriguing idea with some interesting atmospheric touches. Ultimately, I found the plot so disjointed and unbelievable, the suspense non-existent--and getting worse at 75 minutes--that I gave up totally. Ferrer has a certain "Sad Sack" persona that might work in the right film, but I didn't think that he conveyed any real passion or depth beyond his hangdog appearance. (10-2-95) Beginning

Haunting, The (1963) (****, horror, classic) (7-19-99) (D.-Robert Wise; Julie Harris, Claire Bloom, Richard Johnson, Russ Tamblyn, Lois Maxwell, Fay Compton) With the remake of the The Haunting coming out this month, I thought it appropriate to resee and review the original. My review is based on the magnificent letterboxed Turner Classic Movies cable version that just showed. Based on the horrific Shirley Jackson's The Haunting of Hill House. An anthropologist who studies ESP (Johnson) enlists two psychics (Harris and Bloom) to investigate the allegedly haunted Hill House in Maine. They are joined by the family heir (Tamblyn), there to protect his interests. Hill House has sat abandoned, uninhabitable for 90 years, and the professor is going to use it to PROVE the existence of psychic phenomena. Sounds hackney and old hat? Don't count on it. In a time when horror is equated with increasingly effective special effects and more gore, what is frequently lost is that true terror comes from the mind. In Haunting Wise knows how to slip past our civilized defenses and get directly at our primordial fears, much as the house does to its visitors.

The house is described as being built by its misanthrophic original owner almost as a nightmare. No angles are square. No walls are straight. Doors are not hung true and will close without warning. The decor is baroque. The whole effect is disorienting and disturbing without you being sure exactly why. The stark black and white cinematography superbly captures this. Shadows and lighting disorient. Sounds disturb, shock, terrorize. All of the subtle physical effects are marvelously complemented by the actors. You feel their disbelief, their growing fear, their terror. Wise learned his craft from the Val Lewton who did the visual masterpiece The Cat People (1942). You will recognize the style.

I am looking forward to the new release. They have the effects now to realize the physical manifestations (the trailers look marvelous). The only question is whether they can manage the critical human element. If they succeed with that they may well have a classic.

In summary, if you like your fright and terror without gore, check out The Haunting. But DON'T bother if you cannot get the letterboxed version. The film can only be appreciated in the wide screen version. Beginning

Haunting, The (1999) (**1/2, horror) (8-16-99) (D.-Jan De Bont; Lili Taylor, Liam Neeson, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Owen Wilson, Bruce Dern, Marian Seldes, Todd Field, Virginia Madsen)

A remake of the classic 1963 The Haunting based on Shirley Jackson's The Haunting of Hill House. De Bont made Twister, which was a set of magnificent FX in search of a decent story and characters you could care about. I think he made the same mistake here. What he did was to take the original story and heap plot twist upon complications in order to supply the framework for incorporarting the special effects that he wanted. The result is a plot that is incoherent, self-contradicting, and ludicrous. To name a few problems: the complete disappearance of half the orginal crew for several days after one is injured, the gate key that comes and goes as required, the stopping of the fountain, which is an obvious continuity error. A real disappointment given the quality cast who deserve better. Does it shock, startle or scare? In a few places. But nothing like the much more subtle, well plotted original.

The plot is similar to the original in that three people Nell (Taylor), Theo (Zeta-Jones), and Luke (Wilson) are brought together by Dr. David Marrow (Neeson). They think it is a study of insomnia, but in fact he wants to study the psychology of fear in the supposedly haunted Hill House. Well, it isn't just supposedly; it is haunted, and they aren't the only ones who will be susceptible to fear. If De Bont had left it here, and developed on Jackson's original plot, it could have still been a great movie. The world is full of what ifs. Some of the original dialogue is used and Dern and Seldes have a ball in bit parts as the deranged caretakers.

At one level the film does work. Oh, the house. The entire film is stolen by the HOUSE. Absolutely magnificent. And the FX. Absolutely magnificent. The exterior, and possibly some of the interior, shots were of Harlaxton Manor in Nottinghamshire. The House is just incredible. In terms of sheer majesty and enormity, it kept reminding me of Kane's Xanadu in Citizen Kane. Indeed, the walk-in fireplace and the reflecting mirror shots must surely have been modeled after Kane. Theo's comment when she first walks in is "It's like Charles Foster Kane meets the Munsters." The house is a living, breathing entity. It exudes menace in every gargoyle, every polished tile, and every window. The use of wind, glass, shape changing and animation of the inanimate is really well done. In short, this portion of the film is first class and makes the film worth seeing--especially on the big screen. But if you want plot with images, pass. Beginning

Hatari! (1962) (***, adventure) (D.- Howard Hawks; John Wayne, Elsa Martinelli, Red Buttons, Hardy Kruger, Gérard Blain, Bruce Cabot) Overlong (159 min) action, comedy, romance film with Wayne trapping animals in Africa for zoos. Not without its amusing moments for adults, but kids should find it priceless. Plot aside, several things make it worthwhile for adults. It has some of the most spectacular African footage on film and the chase sequences are classics that have to be seen to be believed. The beautifully integrated Henry Mancini score is a gem. (8-12-96) Beginning

Head Above Water (1996) (***, BLACK comedy)(5-15-00) (D.-Jim Wilson; Harvey Keitel, Cameron Diaz, Craig Sheffer, Billy Zane, Shay Duffin) Script by Geir Eriksen from his novel Hodet over vannet. Super black comedy about George (Keitel) who is an aging judge recently married to nubile Natalie (Diaz), one of his clients. They are enjoying the pleasure of an isolated island paradise where her old friend Lance (Sheffer) lives. While Lance and George are off fishing, ex-flame Kent (Zane) arrives. What happens next is very noirish. Make one wrong decision and the trap door to hell opens up and drags you in step by step. Well, here it isn’t a trap door, it is a revolving door, and everyone keeps making decisions that seem, at least peripherally, logical until you see the consequences.

Quirky. Totally unpredictable. But everything fits together with its own logic. Like a Chinese puzzle box designed by a lunatic. The pairing of Keitel with Diaz is perfect. An older man who sees a chance to regain his youth and can justify it in the name of helping another. Also, he is suitably suspicious of the story he is getting. Diaz is perfect. Young. Desirable. Not very mature, which leads to some reasonable lapses of logic. You have known people like her who are surrounded by disasters; you know better than to stand too close. Sheffer and Zane are good foils. The ending does go over the top, but I still found it enjoyable. And the twists don’t let up even at the very end. Beginning

Heathers (1989) (***, black humor) (D.-Michael Lehmann; Winona Ryder, Christian Slater, Shannen Doherty, Lisanne Falk, Kim Walker, Penelope Milford, Glenn Shadix, Lance Fenton) Satirically black humored. You know you are in for something "completely different" within the first 10 seconds, and it doesn't let up from there. The ending is weak, but the ride there is really worth the price of admission. Beginning

Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse (1991 (****, documentary) (D.- Fax Bahr, George Hickenlooper) This recently showed on cable. It is a fascinating documentary on the filming of Apocalypse Now. It includes outtakes from the movie and the cutting room floor (apparently cameras continued to roll during the director's direction and after the take), home films made at the time, then and present interviews with the stars and writers, and secret audio tapes of Coppola made by his wife. It is a true descent into near madness. Nobody is very pretty in this. You will come away fascinated, but in need of a shower--actually a lot like Vietnam. The insight into Coppola's creative genius, and the destruction of his monumental ego is mesmerizing. Coppola actually comes off fairly well compared to Marlon Brandon; the chaotic ending makes perfect sense afterwards. An interesting artistic touch is the juxtaposition of the film documentary being set to parts of Orson Welles' 1939 radio reading of Heart of Darkness. After seeing this movie, Apocalypse Now is even more intriguing because you understand what was going on behind the scenes. Regardless, of what order you see the two in, however, this is a truly disturbing pair of films. Beginning

Heavy Metal (1981) (12-26-03) (***, animation, sci fi, fantasy) (D.-Gerald Potterton; voices by Richard Romanus, John Candy, Joe Flaherty, Don Francks, Eugene Levy, Harold Ramis, John Vernon) Let’s put this down to a guilty pleasure. A series of independent sci/fantasies loosely linked by the evil wrought by a glowing green gem that exploits the worst in humanity and isn’t above creating its own destruction where necessary. As you might guess from the title many of the vignettes are set to rock music. The sexuality is sophomoric, the nudity courtesy of pneumatic 50’s playmates (the same body is used for the villainess and the heroine), and the styles and music are uneven. Nevertheless, a fun, mindless evening. My favorites are the private detective, the trial of Mr. Clean, and B-17. The last probably resonates since the story resembles one that I read as a kid in Tales from the Crypt or another similar comic book. The new release has one additional apocalyptic sequence that was deleted from the original release for length reasons and only just added now as a trailer. It definitely belongs.

Heist (2001) (***1/2, drama, crime) (6-24-02) (DW.-David Mamet; Gene Hackman, Danny DeVito, Delroy Lindo, Sam Rockwell, Rebecca Pidgeon, Ricky Jay, Patti LuPone) The title sums up the subject and the director-writer sums up the bulk of the film. This is not an actioner, but a character driven film where much of the fighting hinges on precise uses and misuses of English and intellect rather than fists and guns. However, don’t let that last statement imply this film isn’t violent. After a long and successful life of crime, Joe Moore (Hackman) is ready to retire with his sailboat and young wife Fran (Pidgeon). Fence, and all-around low life Mickey (De Vito), has slightly different plans for Joe and his boys (Lindo, Jay) and forces them into one last job. To keep Joe honest, so to speak, Mickey insists that his nephew, Silk (Rockwell), be in on the entire thing. Silk is a loose cannon who thinks there is nothing that cannot be solved with liberal applications of his gun or his “suave” personality and “good” looks. This is anathema to Joe, a master tactician and con artist, who never leaves anything to chance. Every plan has a backup. His earthy explanation of why even an unused backup was a great idea sums things up well.

The film unravels as we are treated to a series of gambits, counter gambits, fatefully ruined opportunities, and startling comebacks. The acting is superb, the dialogue exquisite. Hackman is perfect as the weary but sharp criminal artist. The supporting cast is excellent and interact flawlessly. My only complaint with the film is the unrealistic plot development. The most glaring is that Hackman would not be able to operate so freely after the opening of the movie. However, for me the acting and dialogue more than compensate for this.

Incidentally, this film brings back memories of Mamet’s excellent House of Games. As with many of Mamet’s films, the end is never the end. You are left trying to sort out exactly what you have seen and heard, and wondering what you should take at face value long after fade to black. In short, intellectually more demanding than most films. Review based on the excellent DVD transfer at Beyond Video with no supplementary material. Beginning

Hell's Angels (1930) (***, war, drama) (10-11-04) (D.- Howard Hughes; Ben Lyon, James Hall, Jean Harlow, John Darrow, Lucien Prival) A cross over from silents to talkies. Started as a silent, but the take off of talkies required it to be converted to a sound film. It frequently shows its roots with, for example, intertitle cards and scenes that clearly were designed for purely visual rather than spoken presentation. The film is amazing in its aerial sequences. Hughes used a number of WWI aces as the fliers, and three fliers were killed in the making of the film. They must have had many of the surviving WWI fighters for the film. Quite extraordinary aerial combat scenes. The movie also shows methods of warfare that you have probably never seen before. The zeppelin attack on England uses military techniques that I had never even suspected existed, but apparently were used.

The story is pure melodrama and creaks with age and the film style of the time. Nevertheless, it achieves a certain emotional resonance. Two bothers, Monte and Roy Rutledge (Lyon and Hall), vie for the same hedonistic woman, Helen (Harlow). One brother is a complete wastrel who cares about nothing but his next pleasure; the other is rather a prig, but he is also an enabler for his younger brother, and bails him out of scrapes. The war comes, and the two brothers end up in the same fighter squadron. The end is built around a suspenseful attempt to bomb a German ammunition dump and the aftermath.

Neither side is presented as intrinsically evil – to the extent that the intrinsic horrors of war can be glossed over. These are just men trying to survive and do the right thing, albeit sometimes with considerable ruthlessness. Heroism and cowardice knows no national boundaries.

It is difficult to realize that all of the zeppelin shots must have been done with miniatures. The behemoth plowing through the clouds is amazingly convincing. Its final destruction is also exceptionally realistic. It looks just like the Lakehurst, New Jersey shots of the demise of the Hindenburg. But the Hindenburg didn’t burn until 1937. So they must have had experience with burning zeppelins.

The film is a mixture of black and white, heavily tinted scenes and a dance ball done in two color Technicolor. If you have never seen two color, it is amazingly good. Check it out. The heavy tinting is typical of black and white films, which were frequently not black and white and tinting was used to set moods and situations.

The dog fights have to be seen to be believed. No special effects here. Just dozens of real planes in amazingly tight dogfights. The crashes and the destruction on the ground were marvelous also. This was Harlow’s first film. She was 19 at the time and was cast in the part because the Swedish actress, cast when it was a silent, had an impenetrable accent. Harlow was a stunning woman, shown off by the relaxed censorship codes of the time, and did as credible an acting job as any of the pros. One could easily believe her playing with every available male. The military cook was clearly the model for Cedric (I think that was his name) in the Black Adder WWI segments.

An entertaining evening if you put it in historical perspective, gloss over the overacting and theatrics, focus on the intrinsic story, and can be amazed by the technology and stunts. Review based on the restored 127 minute version shown on Turner Classic Movies.

He Ran All the Way (1951) (***, crime, noir, classic) (D.-John Berry; John Garfield, Shelley Winters, Wallace Ford, Selena Royle, Gladys George, Norman Lloyd) This showed at the Virginia Film Festival and is probably not available on tape. John Berry was one of the featured guests. A classic noir that was suppressed on release as Berry, the writer Hugo Butler, and Garfield were blacklisted that year. Garfield is a weak-willed, weak-minded criminal who wants it now--without thought or care of the consequences. The job goes bad, a cop is killed, and the running Garfield manages to go home with a young woman to her family's apartment. This begins a hostage situation where lower class is pitted against lower class. The wallflower daughter, for whom any man is better than no man, must choose between family and lover. The family, distrustful of the willingness and ability of authority to do the right thing, must deal with the problem internally. And Garfield, for whom an expression of intimacy would be a slap in the face, must deal with the family on whose cooperation his fate depends.

While the story itself is contrived, as is much noir, Garfield's performance is stellar. To survive, he must use his wits, which is limited coinage with him. So he consistently makes the wrong decision, which only drives him deeper into the quagmire. His frantic scrambling, his mercurial personality shifts as he misperceives the intent of those around him, are beautifully portrayed as what little life he has crumbles.

He Ran All the Way was the talented Garfield's final film. He suffered a fatal heart attack at 39, which was shortly after being blacklisted; many have attributed his death to the stress. He came from the slums and played a variety of heavies and antiheros. His roles frequently reflected his left leaning anti-establishment feelings.

The cinematographer was James Wong Howe and was as stunning as we have come to expect from his work. The final scene is marvelous, as once again we are confronted with proof of the last wrong decision Garfield has made.

John Berry fled to France. Literally out the back door with the FBI at the front. He was blacklisted and he moved to a more receptive France after this film. (11-10-97) Beginning

Haunted Sea (1997) (*1/2, horror) (D.-Dan Golden; Joanna Pacula, Don Stroud, Ronald William Lawrence, Marcus Talbot, James Brolin, Duane Whitaker, Krista Allen-Moritt, Brendon Crigler) Direct to video and showing on The Movie Channel. I needed another low grade horror film fix. What can I say. Produced by legendary Shlockmeister Roger Corman. So Macbeth you expected? Probably the best thing about Sea is the 73 minute running time--mercifully short. This is a horror movie, so of course the crews picks up a derelict ship at sea, even though it doesn't show up on their radar. Shortly the recovery crew finds itself knee deep in Aztec gold, a horrific idol Queztacoatl, and a steadily rising body count. Not bad enough to be good, but a nice creepy setting with ship noise and music, and a few good jolts and twists. Otherwise pretty much by the numbers. So help me though, every time I saw the whole monster I couldn't help but think of a very toothy Barney. They should have left it with close ups. Pity poor Brendon Crigler credited with playing the monster. R rated for gore, language, and nudity (gratuitous). (9-7-98) Beginning

Hero (1992) (***, drama, comedy) (Dustin Hoffman, Geena Davis, and Andy Garcia) An entertaining morality play. What makes a hero? As Dustin Hoffman, a real sleeze ball of a petty criminal, demonstrates when he rescues 54 people including an up and coming TV anchor (Davis) from a downed airline, it isn't just the Dudley DoRights that can rise to genuine acts of self-sacrifice and personal risk. The twist comes, when a down-on-his-luck veteran (Garcia), claims the hero's limelight, leaving Hoffman to languish in jail. Garcia is a genuinely nice guy and a stellar media star who uses the position for truly worthy causes. The plot unfolds as the lies unravel. However, the ending gives everyone a warm fuzzy feeling when they leave the theater. While the movie does make interesting observations about the interplay between the media, their subjects, and the public, it never rises above simple entertainment to put real teeth into its satire. If you want to see the ultimate media satire, check out Network .and you may never again watch a news show in the same way. Hoffman's performance in Hero is stellar, and the movie is worth watching for him alone. He has such a plastic face ("Think plastics!") that he can be all things to all people. Whenever he is on the screen, he is pure pleasure to watch. (9-21-93) Beginning

Hero (2004) (****, war, drama, romance) (10-12-04) (D.- Zhang Yimou; Jet Li, Tony Leung, Maggie Cheung, Zhang Ziyi, Chen Dao Ming, Donnie Yen) Visual and aural poetry encases Hero from first to last frame. A film of stunning beauty with deep emotional resonances. The King of Qin (Ming) is in the process of uniting the 7 kingdoms of China via bloody warfare. Three assassins, Long Sky (Yen) and the lovers Broken Sword (Leung) and Flying Snow (Cheung), of consummate ability have been trying to stop him. So far they have failed, but their skill is such that the king is so fearful that no one can approach him within 100 paces. Enter the man Noname (Li), who has succeeded in killing all three assassins. He comes to collect accolades and his rewards. The launching point for the story is his relating how he succeeded in killing the three best assassins in the world. Not surprisingly it was by an astute combination of skill and guile that exploited each one’s weaknesses.

The king is extremely astute and the interplay between the two men represents one of the key emotional themes in the film. Their quiet philosophical moments are deeply moving. Others include the interplay between Noname and the three assassins and between the two lovers.

The story and the imagery unfolds much like that of a story teller spinning his web of magic before a village. In places realism takes a back seat to drama. The characters are all larger than life. The story epic in its telling. The passions monumental. The backdrop awesome in its scope. The significance revolutionary in its importance.

The film is truly breathtaking. Many of the scenes could be framed and mounted. The colors are rich and fully saturated. The motion fluid, mesmerizing. The initial fight in the rain and in the autumn forest are just two. For me the film does go a bit overboard on the wire work, but its other strengths outweigh this fault.

Not to be missed on the big screen. For another view of the same period, check out the stunning, more realistic, and deeper The Emperor and, The Assassin. Beginning

He Walked by Night (1948) (**1/2, noir, crime) (D.-Alfred L. Werker; Richard Basehart, Scott Brady, Roy Roberts, Whit Bissell, Jack Webb) Solid, but dated noir. A brilliant thief kills an overly curious cop and the manhunt begins. Police procedural told in a semi-documentary style. The hyper-paranoid criminal manages to stay one step ahead of the police, but is finally brought down by a lowly manhole cover. Some fine noir cinematography. Spectacular manhunt in the sewer bears many resemblances to the one in the superb The Third Man (1949). (7-29-96) Beginning

Hexed (1993) (**, comedy) (D.- Alan Spencer; Arye Gross, Claudia Christian, Adrienne Shelly, Ray Baker, R. Lee Ermey, Michael Knight, Robin Curtis) Erratic, but with a few absolutely delightful moments. Hexed is a spoof of the various fatal attraction, psycho thrillers going around, but with its own fractured vision. Christian (Ivanova from Babylon 5) is a hoot as the psychopathic super model, Hexina. Gross is a psychopathic liar who will say anything to impress others--doomed when everyone knows you are a psychopathic liar. He finally resorts to action to support his lies, which puts him on a collision course with Hexina. Slow on the set up (I almost gave up, but $3.00 is $3.00), but quite funny once Christian and Gross start bouncing off each other like demented bumper cars. (7-5-95) Beginning

Hidden, The (1987) (**1/2, sci-fi horror) (D.-Jack Sholder, Kyle MacLachlan, Michael Nouri, Ed O'Ross, Clu Gulager, Claudia Christian, Clarence Felder) A passable, high adrenaline sci-fi horror movie. An F.B.I. agent and an L.A. cop hunt a murderous, hard-rock loving alien who takes over human bodies. The hunt is vicious and the alien's evasive actions are effectively and quite suspensefully presented at times. MacLachlan is good in his best "I'm not exactly what I seem to be" persona. Given the fact that humans are instinctive survivors, the ending has a certain fatalistic believability. (9-5-93) Beginning

Hidden Fortress, The (1958) (***, adventure) (12-7-98) (D.- Akira Kurosawa; Toshiro Mifune, Misa Uehara, Minoru Chiaki, Takashi Shimura) At Film Festival at Home (Los Alamos) Not one of Kurosawa’s better efforts but an extraordinarily influential movie nevertheless (otherwise ***). Ever wondered what inspired Star Wars? Search no longer. Here it is! Lucas reverentially acknowledges it. Set in feudal Japan, one has a swashbuckling general (Mifune), a haughty princess (Uehara), and a fortune in gold necessary to preserve her family. Throw in two low-life Laurel and Hardy mercenaries who cannot agree on the time of day even when their lives depend on it. Stir in a hidden fortress. Sound familiar? A few changes, of course. Katanas (Japanese long swords) rather than light sabers. A wagon with hidden gold rather than the Millenia Falcon. Also, the two bumbling mercenaries are so disreputable that even R2D2 and C-3PO would look down their integrated circuits at them. Kurosawa manages some great sword work courtesy of the superb Mifune, clever plot twists, and his usual fascinating collections of off beat characters. All this makes the movie watchable, but unfortunately the film as a whole is marred by excessive length (126 minutes); at 20-30 minutes less, it could have moved right along. Still for Kurosawa and Star Wars fans, a must see. (1-23-95) Beginning

High Anxiety (1977) (**1/2, humor) (D.-Mel Brooks; Mel Brooks, Madeline Kahn, Cloris Leachman, Harvey Korman, Dick Van Patten, Ron Carey, Howard Morris) Very uneven spoof of Hitchcock, but with a few absolutely delightful scenes. The film really cannot work as satire because Hitch never took himself seriously and always leavened his films, no matter how ghastly, with elements of humor--frequently black. I suspect fans of Hitchcock will get the most enjoyment just by the deja vous as Brooks incorporates elements of numerous Hitchcock films. My favorite scenes were the killing in the phone booth and Korman's werewolf. A light evening if you are in the mood for a few laughs. (5-27-97) Beginning

High Fidelity (2000) (***, comedy) (7-24-00) (D.- Stephen Frears; John Cusack, Iben Hjejle, Todd Louiso, Jack Black, Lisa Bonet, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Joan Cusack, Tim Robbins) Very quirky comedy about a misfit Rob (Cusack) who has never had a satisfactory relationship with women and who has just split with his latest, Laura (Hjejle), and misses her badly. You know you are in for an unusual film when Rob addresses the audience and begins a litany of the top five breakups and what was wrong with each woman. We get a history of Rob’s love life with him revealing a lot more about himself than about the women. Rob runs a record store and has surrounded himself with a couple of other misfits, milquetoast Dick (Louiso) and overbearing Barry (Black). These are people who are focused on their business and see little beyond it, which is not unlike the way many people live their lives. Rob does his help one step better by using his record collection as a metaphor for his love life.

Rob is very introspective and totally immature in his dealings with women. As he explores his past and present, we find out whether he will mature or continue shambling through life shedding women like dogs shed fleas. Subplots include his employees and Laura’s latest boy friend Ian (Robbins) who is in "conflict resolution"—a potentially dangerous occupation under the circumstances.

So if you are in the mood for a very offbeat evening, do give High Fidelity a look. Beginning

High Noon (1952) (****, Drama, Western) ( D. Fred Zinnemann, Gary Cooper, Grace Kelly, Otto Kruger, Lloyd Bridges, Thomas Mitchell, Katy Jurad) Academy Awards for Best Actor.(Gary Cooper) and Music-Best Song "High Noon" (Do Not Forsake Me, Oh My Darlin) A stylish, suspenseful black and white classic to which many modern action, suspense, western movies pay homage. For example, compare it to the opening of Sergio Leone's classic Once Upon a Time in the West. Marshal Kane (Cooper) is marrying a Quaker (Kelly), hanging up his badge, and leaving the town he cleaned up and successfully defended for five years when he discovers that the murderer he sent to be hanged 5 years earlier and three of his gunslingers are returning for vengeance. Cooper is torn between his sense of pride and duty and his wife's strongly pacifistic views. The action unfolds as we switch between the henchmen waiting at the depot for their leader arriving on the noon train, the marshal trying to rally the town, the wife abandoning him, the scorned Mrs. Ramirez (Cooper's and the killer's past lover) preparing her escape, and the skipped over deputy trying to blackmail the Marshall. Most importantly, the response of the townspeople will lead to philosophical and psychological discussions. The tension unfolds in real time (one hour of movie = one hour of time) and I shudder to think how difficult this was. The frequently viewed town clocks relentlessly tick off the minutes of the final hour before noon. Fate on a timetable. The Marshall exhausts his options and waits stoically as the clocks tick towards destiny. The fight is adequate by modern standards, but the build up and the very end are outstanding. For its time this movie is remarkably hard edged in its view of human nature. While the plot shows some lapses by modern standards, the cinematography and elegant choreography more than make up for them. A must see for serious students of modern suspense. As an aside, Cooper was quite sick at the time, but had to do a very physical fist fight with Lloyd Bridges. One of Bridges's sons was watching the fight from up in the loft, but spoiled it by speaking up when his father was "beaten up". The entire scene had to be reshot. (10-4-92) (10-23-00) Beginning

High Noon Additional comments. (1952) (10-23-00) Before reviewing the TV version, we rented the original and watched it again. As it turned out the copy from Beyond Video was the 40th anniversary edition copy with Leonard Maltin. This is a delightful addition with comments by the producer, the director, the actors, and the son of the cinematographer (rock star David Crosby). Fascinating. Bucking the trend at the time, High Noon was black and white. It was produced for a measly $730,000 in a 28 day shoot. It did not present the hero in the standard heroic mold, but made him human, fallible, and with moments of weakness. For these reasons and because many of the people associated with the film ended up being black listed by the House Unamerican Activities Committee, the film was highly controversial and was even picketed. The story about Bridges’s son Beau ruining one take of the fist fight is correct. Cooper was suffering from a bad back and had to endure a second take. I highly recommend watching this. When the train arrives, it is first blowing white smoke then black. What the director and cinematographer who were filming in the middle of the track didn’t realize was that the black was a warning that the brakes had failed. Only as they train rushed towards them and failed to stop did they scatter. It was so close that the train ran over the camera. However, the film cartridge survived and that is the take that you see. Beginning

Additional Comments on High Noon: (4-2-01) It bombed on initial trial showing. The director went back and reedited it to increase the tension, especially with more close ups of Cooper. He also added the clock image and the ballad. High Noon without the ballad or the clocks is unthinkable. Cooper was in real pain throughout the filming, which may well contribute to his harried look. His gait was due to a hip problem. He had a back problem and a hernia. Where he lifts his bride onto the table, he is in excruciating pain but manages to conceal it. Cooper’s career was at the bottom then, but this film remade it. In spite of his right wing views, he was a staunch supporter of the writer Carl Foreman. Foreman was up before the House UnAmerican Activities Committee (HUAC) for his leftist views and refused to name names, which resulted in him being blacklisted. The film is very much his personal statement of one man standing alone before insurmountable odds.

Incidentally, John Wayne hated High Noon. He felt it was the antithesis of everything a Western should be. Real heroes didn’t grovel, complain, and certainly didn’t need other people to help them! Beginning

High Noon (2000) (**1/2, drama, western) (10-23-00) (D.-Rod Hardy; W.-John W. Cunningham (magazine story, The Tin Star), Carl Foreman; Tom Skerritt, Suzanna Thompson, Reed Diamond, Maria Conchita Alonso, Dennis Weaver, August Schellenberg, Michael Madsen) Reverential TV remake of the classic 1951 High Noon. See previous description of the film if you are not familiar with the plot. Good production values and acting are strong points. This version follows the original film very closely, down to and including much of the staging and visual appearances of critical scenes. There are a few changes, and some improve it and others add weaknesses. Skerritt does a credible Kane. Thompson improves on the Grace Kelly’s Amy Kane; she is older, a more mature actress, and was given a more developed role. This version includes the awesome crane shot where Kane stands absolutely alone in the street, but they put it in before he realizes his situation. I know they were doing it as indications of what was to come, but for me it is totally out of place. They also dropped the clock image, which is a major weakness. The town was adequately seedy and the boy in the loft during the fist fight is an in joke about Bridges’s son ruining the first take in the original film.

The bottom line is that when you remake a classic, you should have something unique to add. This version doesn’t. In particular, the tensions and the pressure on the sheriff are not built as relentlessly as in the original. In the original, the theme song, the stark rail lines waiting to be filled by the arriving killer, and the unforgiving ticking clocks are perfect as is the stark black and white cinematography. My recommendation is to rent the original and see one of the great westerns. Beginning

High Sierra (1941) (**1/2, drama) (D.- Raoul Walsh; Humphrey Bogart, Ida Lupino, Arthur Kennedy, Alan Curtis, Joan Leslie, Henry Hull) Intriguing, but ultimately unsatisfying film about last caper of Mad Dog Earle (Bogart). Involves gang hanger-on Lupino who cannot keep away from the wrong men and a crippled poor girl (Leslie) who needs that operation to walk right. Grand finale is set against the starkly beautiful, sterile peaks of the high sierras. Much of the pleasure comes from Bogart playing the aging, world weary robber who was sprung for this big heist. He is believably resigned as he makes the most of these incompetents that fate has dealt him., Ultimately, he fails at the end in the few good things that he tries to do in his life. (11-28-94) Beginning

Himalaya aka Himalaya - l'enfance d'un chef aka Caravan (1999) (****, docudrama drama, adventure) (10-15-01) (D.-Eric Valli; W.- Nathalie Azoulai, Olivier Dazat; Thilen Lhondup, Gurgon Kyap, Lhakpa Tsamchoe, Karma Wangel, Karma Tensing) An extraordinary film. Visually stunning. Well acted. Insightful into human nature. A slice of a richly traditional, but vanishing, culture. The setting is a small village in the Dolpo district of Nepal in high, magnificently foreboding mountains. Your feelings that this is a story set in, perhaps, the early part of the twentieth century are incorrect. These caravans were still running at least into the closing years of the twentieth century and are the life’s blood of some of the villages. The crop is never enough to feed the village through the winter and the village’s survival depends on a yak caravan they send out that trades salt for grain. This year’s caravan returns early as the leader, the aging chief’s son, was killed in an accident. However, the chief, Tinle (Lhondup) suspects Karma (Kyap) actually killed him to gain the chiefdom. Thus begins the age-old struggle between youthful strength and self-confidence against age and cultural tradition. Throw in the young widow Pema (Tsamchoe), her son Passang (Wangel), Tenle’s lama son Norbou (Tensing) and two competing caravans. It is ultimately a struggle for control of the village by two headstrong men.

The film is suspenseful, poignant, insightful of human nature and provides a look at a culture and way of life as alien to most of us as the far side of the moon. We get much of the villager’s lifestyle, customs and philosophies. The culture is steeped in rich and ancient traditions that to a considerable degree dictate their lives. I refer to Himalaya as a docudrama only in that the lifestyle is accurately portrayed. Valli is a documentary filmmaker who has spent years in this area making films. He shows the most loving respect for his subjects and their lives. Indeed, his actors aren’t actors but local villagers, although you’d never know it from their fluid portrayals. This is probably due to two reasons: the villagers are no doubt very familiar with and comfortable with the documentary director and his film crew, and they portray more themselves than fictional characters. The film is an extraordinary feat given the remote location and the conditions under which it had to be made.

Of course, the all-imposing character of the mountain overshadows everything. It is a living, breathing element. One story that brings home the total isolation of the people is the subplot around the tree.

The film is billed as Himalaya and that is what appears on the posters. However, the opening title is Caravan, which is the title used in Canada. The French title is obviously a multifaceted description of a number of the issues in the film. The film is in Tibetan with excellent English subtitles; the dialogue is sparse and straight forward. Himalaya is a must-see on the big screen, but at Vinegar Hill, do get a place where you can view the subtitles low on the screen. Beginning

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (2005) (**, sci fi, humor) (6-01-05) (D.- Garth Jennings; screen play: Douglas Adams and Karey Kirkpatrick, based on the book by Adams; Martin Freeman, Sam Rockwell, Mos Def, Zooey Deschanel, Bill Nighy, Alan Rickman, Anna Chancellor, John Malkovich) I am not a pathological fan of Hitchhiker as are many. I loved the first book of the four-book trilogy, but I could never get through any of the others. I consider the BBC TV production a flawed masterpiece. Very uneven, but when it hits on all cylinders it has some of the drollest, quirkiest and riotously funny sequences on film.

If you are unfamiliar with the original (actually, there many originals), it begins with Arthur Dent (Freeman), an everyman, earthman about to be rescued from the destruction of the earth, which is being done by the Vogons to make way for an interstellar bypass. His rescuer is his long time friend, Ford Prefect (Def), who Arthur has never suspected was an alien studying earth. Thus begins one of the most fractured tales of discovery and exploration. Dent’s guide is the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, the best selling travel guide to the Universe—not because it is the best or the most accurate (it isn’t), but because it is a little cheaper and has the soothing words Don’t Panic on it. He will be tossed into space; encounter the two-headed president of the universe, Zaphod Beeblebrox (Rockwell), who is wanted for the cosmic equivalent of grand theft auto; meet a robot that makes Eeyore in Winnie the Pooh seem like a comedian; discover how planets are made; and basically have a few totally off the wall experiences. If this doesn’t make any sense, it doesn’t. Actually within Adams’ warped world it makes perfect sense.

Long after Adams failed to bring it to film in Hollywood, and after his untimely death, they have succeeded at producing a theatrical film. It appears that it was done reverently by people who loved the original. Unfortunately, it doesn’t even come close to the original TV version. I get more laughs in the first 15 minutes of the original than in the entire remake. It’s hard to pin down exactly what went wrong. They made it a little glossier, but did keep some of the cheesy effects of the original. They jazzed up the effect at the expense of much of Adams’ droll dialogue. The principals, at least for me, didn’t measure up to the original. Trillian (Deschanel) just wasn’t flaky enough. Rickman as Marvin the Robot was a good choice, but then they cut many of his most memorable lines, so you never really got to appreciate the depth of his depression, ego, and paranoia. They cut out the Restaurant at the End of the Universe sequence, and they manufactured a feel-good ending, which took time from the humor. Perhaps they just couldn’t figure out how to recover from cutting out about a third of the original. They did keep the original theme song which is a gem, and the sequence with the little creatures on the planet’s surface is new and a delight.

One of my graduate students, who was totally unfamiliar with the original, thought it was pretty funny. Perhaps, then, taken in the vacuum of space with no preconceptions, it does work and introduces a new generation to Adams. I will be very interested to see how others react to this version and then how they react to the original. It will make for an interesting study in the psychology of humor. So I really cannot say don’t see this version, because I don’t know how others will react. However, what I can say, is after you have seen the film do rent the 3 hour BBC version for comparison. Let me know of your experience.

Just to give you an idea of Adams’ humor, Arthur is about to have a whole brain-ectomy performed on him. He shouts “You cannot have my brain. I am using it!” By this time, we intimately know Dent, so the absolutely accurate response of “Hardly” comes as no surprise.

Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, The (1981) (***1/2, sci if, humor) (D.-Alan J.W. Bell; Peter Jones, Simon Jones, David Dixon, Sandra Dickinson, Mark Wing-Davey) The BBC miniseries (about 3 hours worth) written by Douglas Adams from his radio show and books "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" is available on tape. I really enjoyed the first book but could never get through the other two. The BBC series captures the droll essense of the first novel dead on. Earthman Arthur Dent is rescued from the destruction of Earth by a visiting alien Ford Prefect (Dixon) going incognito to study us. The reason for the destruction makes perfect sense in a bureaucratic nightmare way. Thus, begins an journey literally to the end of the universe with as diverse a cast of misfits as you will find anywhere. These include Zaphod Beeblebrox, a two headed scientist, who always manages to see both sides of an issue, a curvaceous genius Trillian (Dickinson), and a voice-of-doom robot that makes Eyore in Winnie the Pooh look like an optimist. Throw in talking doors and a restaurant main course that tries to sell itself to you and you pretty much have the total insanity of the film. The whole thing is held together by a talking book, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, which is the ultimate source on what to do, how to do it, and what everything means. And, as with most books it has some critical errors.

If you don't enjoy the destruction of the Earth in about the first 10 minutes, you can turn it off since you have seen the fractured style and it doesn't mesh with your personality. As with much BBC sci fi, character and story line are the main feature. They obviously didn't have much for FX and they didn't waste what they had on them. So the effects are rather cheesy, but for me this actually adds to the charm and humor. (10-12-98) Beginning

Hitchcock's MacGuffin (12-21-98) A term used by Alfred Hitchcock to describe a plot element that "must seem to be of vital importance to the characters", even though its actual identity is immaterial. "It's the device, the gimmick, if you will, or the papers the spies are after." Hitchcock described it in Truffaut's book Hitchcock with the following story. Two hunters are in the Scottish Highlands. One asks the other what is in his package. The answer "A MacGuffin." The answer to the natural response "What is a MacGuffin?" is "It's an apparatus for trapping lions." "But there are no lions in the Highlands." "Then that's not a MacGuffin." The point is that it doesn't matter what it is. It is merely a plot device to focus everyones' attention. [Taken from Ebert's Little Movie Glossary (1994) Andrew and McMeel] Beginning

Hitchcock, Revised Edition (1983) (book, ****) (11-30-98) (Writer Francois Truffaut) "Hitchcockian" says it all. No other film director was so influential at creating magnificent suspense and macabre black humor through incisive set up, story lines, and editing as Alfred Hitchcock. His name is synonymous with suspense, and while younger viewers may not recognize it, much of what they see as real suspense (as opposed to our current mad slasher films) was developed by the rotund master himself. Hitchcock was also legendary for his private personality and specious responses to questions. Truffaut, in a series of interviews in 1962, got Hitchcock to open up and fully discuss not only his views on the art of film making and suspense, but also a lot of his attitudes towards life in general--which in no small way reveals the subtext of his films. The original was published in 1967; this revised edition, published after Hitchcock's death in 1980, includes information on Hitchcock's later films.

Hitchcock is a labor of love. Truffaut clearly revered Hitchcock's work and art, and had only the greatest respect for Hitchcock. His love and deep knowledge of Hitchcock's work clearly shows through as Truffaut probes on both the art and the absolutely entertaining little vignettes that helped make up Hitchcock's career. Hitchcock is funny, touching, insightful. It is filled with still shots from many of his films starting with his silents. I had to force myself to put it down every night so that I could get some sleep.

For example, the book addressed the following questions and facts as well as much more: Why and where did Hitchcock appear in each of his films from The Lodger on? Why does he appear early on in all of his later films? How did he manage to appear briefly in Lifeboat, even though all of the characters are on a lifeboat, and he isn't one of them? How and why in Rope did they manage to make the entire film in unbroken 10 minute segments (the length of a single film cassette)? Contrast this with the usual 10-15 second takes. In Rope, how did they manage to change the skyline with its clouds and the sunset? In Notorious, how did Hitch succeed in writing a screen play about an atom bomb--in 1944, while the first atom bomb, one of America's most closely guarded secrets was not set off until 1945? And what were the repercussions? That the WWII propaganda film Adventure Malgache was based on a true story and why it wasn't released? How did Hitch handle the huge difference in height between Claude Rains and Ingrid Bergman in Notorious even when you could see all of them? That in To Catch A Thief, it was fortuitous that Brigitte Auber was an acrobat? That in The Wrong Man, the capture of the thief at the end was exactly the way it happened? Why in North by Northwest, did they used a concealed camera in the United Nations Building? Why did Hitch believe that he could never be replaced in the directing of one of his films?

Also, Hitchcock didn't read fiction. Just biographies and travel. He didn't want to always be asking himself if it would make a good movie or not! "I don't like literature that is flowery and where the main attraction is turn of a phrase. My mind is strictly visual, ..." The irony of this, of course, is that Hitchcock was the master of subtle visual images, the visual "turn of a phrase".

I'll conclude by including a quote from a 1947 press conference that, to me, captures the essense of Hitchcock's films:

"I aim to provide the public with beneficial shocks. Civilization has become so protective that we're no longer able to get our goose bumps instinctively. The only way to remove the numbness and revive our moral equilibrium is to use artificial means to bring about the shock. The best way to achieve that, it seems to me, is through a movie."

Nobody has done it better than Alfred Hitchcock. "Good night." Beginning

Hitchcock Returns. Until recently it was thought that all of Alfred Hitchcock's films had been widely viewed. Not quite correct. Hitch did two 30-minute propaganda films during WWII. As I understand it, both were classified by the British government; it was only in the past couple of years that a researcher learned of their existence and managed to extricate them from the British bureaucracy. The films, Bon Voyage and Aventure Malgache, were done in French for export to the French underground. Bon Voyage actually made it. Aventure was promptly suppressed when the government saw it; by association this may ultimately account for the burying of both.

Both films are now subtitled and premiered this month on Turner Movie Classic cable channel. The subtitling is very good on Aventure, but awful on Bon Voyage where the subtitler forgot that TVs have overscan and do not show the entire film frame. So you frequently lose the bottom line. However, enough facts, what about the films? Neither are great, but both are must-sees for Hitchcock fans. Even doing a propaganda film, Hitchcock was not about to suppress his artistry, his sense of humor, his marvelous visual imagery, and his unique way of spinning a tale.

Bon Voyage is about the debriefing of a downed flier after his successful escape from France. However, as in any Hitchcock film, nothing is as it seems as the story unfolds in flashbacks. Murder, intrigue, and double crosses make for a classic Hitchcock brew.

Aventure is based on fact. The story takes place in French Madagascar following the fall of France and concerns the operation of the underground working against the Vichy government. The humorous mechanism for telling the story is a classic Hitchcock touch. Since the story is factual, it doesn't provide some of the dramatic opportunities of Bon Voyage, but because of the political elements I found it fascinating. Also, it has one scene, mostly wordless, that is marvelously Hitchcockian--instantly recognizable as his. It involves the fiancee, her thought processes as conveyed by her facial expressions, and the fabulous camera work coupling the elements together.

Why did they suppress Aventure? Apparently because it showed the internecine and deep divides between French factions. Factual, but just too sensitive an area for good propaganda.

As a final point, Hitchcock was in Hollywood during the war but returned to England in 1943 to make these films. He felt that if he didn't make a direct contribution to the British war effort, he would never forgive himself. (2-11-97) Beginning

Hollow Man (2000) (**, horror, sci fi) (8-21-00) (D.-Paul Verhoeven; W.-Andrew W. Marlowe; Elisabeth Shue, Kevin Bacon, Josh Brolin, Kim Dickens, Greg Grunberg, William Devane) Awesome special effects. Awesomely bad movie. The F/X are ****. But overall, the movie is so far in the hole it has to reach up to touch the bottom. As my wife succinctly stated: "The plot is even more invisible than the man." Sebastian Caine (Bacon) is one of the greatest scientists of our time, and he is working with a select team for the military on an invisibility formula. He isn’t a particularly nice guy. He has an insufferable ego and has the looks, brains, money, and power to get pretty much what he wants in women, although not necessarily keep them. His past conquests include Linda McKay (Shue) who is the second on his team and is no longer interested in him except as a scientist. Of course he tests the invisibility serum on himself, but things go wrong. So far so good.

What does the greatest scientist in the world do with his invisibility? Forget any intellectual or power goals and think baser instincts. Very base. No character development. No justification. No logic. No plot development. Just an opportunity for the F/X, more skin, and another indestructible monster. I thought at times that I had wandered into Friday the 13 part 300. The director even pulls a shabby dream sequence. In the lab he does not even get his animal characteristics right as Gorillas are strict herbivores.

Hollow Man is clearly modeled after the classic The Invisible Man. Invisible was F/X driven, but there was a logic in that early film The scientist was driven mad by the serum, but in keeping with his intellect his goals were megalomaniacal. In Sebastian, we see no disintegration into madness. While he is not a nice guy, here is not a man who would logically suddenly become an evil person when given absolute power.

The F/X plain and simply put are extraordinary. The invisibility is breathtakingly handled. Done with cg and magnificent blue and green screen techniques (Bacon was frequently painted green so that they could mat him out). It has to be seen to be believed.

What a pity. If only the director and writer had gone for a real story. They had the talented cast to pull it off, and it could have been magnificent. This is especially disappointing from Verhoeven who gave us Basic Instincts, Total Recall, and RoboCop. These films gave us suspense, wit, satire and style. Hollow Man could have given us so much. What a downer.

In summary, if you are fascinated by F/X and/or mad slasher movies, give Hollow a look. Otherwise I suggest you vanish out the door. Beginning

Holmes Triple Feature. (3-25-02) This DVD at Sneak Reviews has three classic Sherlock Holmes films with the dynamic duo of Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce doing their stellar job of playing Holmes and Dr. Watson.

Dressed to Kill (1946) (3-25-02)

Terror By Night (1946) (***, crime) (3-25-02)

Woman in Green (1945) (***, crime, drama) (3-25-02)

Hollywood Dinosaurs (1991) (**1/2, documentary, sci fi, horror) (3-04-03) (DW-Ted Newson; narrator:- Reid Richmond ) This one hour documentary will be a hoot for lovers of old sci fi, horror films. It describes some of the techniques used but focuses on the films themselves. Of particular humor are the overheated, over the top previews of which the documentary abounds. Many of the films I either only heard of or have not seen at all. As the theater marquees have been known to claim, “I couldn’t believe what I was seeing.” Some such as Lost World were classics. Others were so abysmally bad that a teenager could do better. The Scandinavian film where the entire monster regenerates from a segment of tail found in the ice (my subconscious has mercifully suppressed the name) is high on the last list.

My guess is that this was ultra-low budget and much of what you see was selected on the basis of cost to the producers. This wouldn’t have been a problem, but the editing and focus of the presentation is confused. The director couldn’t figure out whether or not to play it straight and never got a good balance. Nevertheless, a gem for grade Z monster horror film lovers. Review based on the VHS tape loaned to me by Heather Rowe. Not surprisingly it is not in print and I haven’t been able to find a source, although used copies are out of stock on some online suppliers.

For those interested in dinosaurs in film, there is a nice little historical listing at

http://www.cmnh.org/dinoarch/2000May/msg00404.html

Hombre (1967) (**1/2, western drama) (D.- Martin Ritt; Paul Newman, Fredric March, Richard Boone, Diane Cilento, Cameron Mitchell, Barbara Rush, Martin Balsam) At Film Festival at Home (Los Alamos). Stylishly dated, but intriguing character study and drama from an Elmore Leonard story. Newman was raised an Indian and finds himself thrown into the White Man's world in Arizona before the turn of the century. A stagecoach ride sets sets the scene for throwing the different characters together. There is obviously a lot more going on than meets the eye and much of the pleasure is in trying to figure out what is happening, how the different characters are going to react, and what will happen after fade to black. As in any good western, the heavies help make it. I enjoyed Richard Boone in his TV Paladin role (now available on tape), and he does not disappoint here on the other side of the gun. Complex characters and well acted except for Newman whose part I felt was too glacial. As in many human situations, once things cross a certain line, people must relentlessly drive to the end no matter how destructive the consequences. (2-28-95) Beginning

Home Fries (***1/2, drama, black humor) (D.-Dean Parisot; Drew Barrymore, Luke Wilson, Jake Busey, Catherine O'Hara, Shelly Duval) The Film Festival previewed the nearly finished film. Extremely black humored story of crazed, manipulative mother who has her two sons kill her husband and then expects them to kill the woman he was having an affair with. Only they don't know who she is. While they are looking, one brother develops a crush on a pretty, very pregnant unmarried young thing (Barrymore) down at the local burger palace--created especially for the film. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to see where this is going. O'Hara succeeds in playing a truly unhinged woman with a sympathetic edge--her addition to the original screen play. The cast is charming, especially Wilson and Barrymore. The humor is very quirky. It reminds me to some extent of Raising Arizona.

My favorite scene in the film was where Wilson gets roped into taking Barrymore to her Lamaze class. This is incredibly sensuous and riotously funny. The woman running the class was not an actual Lamaze instructor, but went through several classes to get to the style and cadence and then added her own snappy dialogue. This scene was essentially one line in the screen play. An amusing side line is that in real life Wilson is Barrymore's boy friend. Before the scene, they had a very heated fight and were not speaking. You would never know it from the scene and the writer suggested that during the scene they may have actually been making up. Nice way to make up.

The writer Vince Gilliam was there after the film. This was his first comedy; he normally writes for the X Files. On the other hand, given the humor in many of the X Files and the black humor of Home Fries, maybe this isn't much of a stretch. (11-24-97) Beginning

Homicide (1991) (***, Drama) (D.-David Mamet, Joe Mantegna, William H. Macy) Taut, nasty little psychological study so characteristic of Mamet. A top homicide detective (Mantegna) is Jewish by genes only. He finds himself torn asunder by his loyalties to his partner, the police force, and his growing recognition of his heritage when he becomes enmeshed in a murder of an old Jewish woman who may have been killed by antisemitics. As with much of Mamet's work, little is as it seems and the convoluted plot keeps you off balance to the end. Don't prejudge before the very end. (11-8-93) Beginning

Honeymoon in Vegas (1992) (**1/2, humor) (D.-Andrew Bergman; James Caan, Nicolas Cage, Sarah Jessica Parker) A very offbeat little comedy that, while it doesn't connect, does deserve a high score for effort. The premise is that Gage and his girl friend are in Vegas to get married. Caan, a gambler, becomes infatuated with her since she is a perfect match for his deceased wife (she had better be since Parker plays both parts). Caan wins the girl friend in a poker match and spends the rest of the movie trying to convince her to marry him, while Cage spends it trying to recoup his losses. Remember, I said very offbeat. The humor is low key arising more from the absurdity of the situations than for any slap stick or incisive wit. Gage manages his usual off the wall persona with flair. Caan makes a very suave and believable gambler. Parker as the straight woman is worthy of both men's pursuit. Set to great Elvis music and the Vegas Strip where insanity passes for normalcy. (11-9-92) Beginning

Horror of Dracula (1958) (***, horror) (D.-Terence Fisher; Peter Cushing, Christopher Lee, Melissa Stribling, Michael Gough, Carol Marsh, John Van Eyssen, Valerie Gaunt, Miles Malleson) Classic Hammer Films schlock that basically reinvented the vampire-horror genre. Handsomely appointed with marvelous sets, color, blood, and heaving, scantily clad women. The graceful tall, imposing Lee was a perfect new Dracula. Cushing, who the younger generation may only remember as the coolly malevolent Grand Moff Tarkin in Star Wars, frequently was the good guy and plays Van Helsing here--although he is generally playing catch up to the Count. A fun, not overly gory film with a classic photofinish ending for vampire fans. See Vampires. (7-14-97) Beginning

Horse Feathers (1932) (***, classic comedy, slapstick) (D.-Norman Z. McLeod; Groucho Marx, Harpo Marx, Chico Marx, Zeppo Marx, Thelma Todd, David Landau, Robert Greig, Nat Pendleton) Groucho (Professor Wagstaff) becomes new president of Huxley College; his opening song to the faculty and students "Whatever It Is, I'm Against It" sets the tone for his reign. His great goal is to beat rival Darwin U at football. His other great goal is Thelma Todd, the available campus widow, who is also being courted by Groucho's son (Zeppo), a student whose grades are currently not faring well. Groucho goes to the speakeasy to recruit some professional football players as "students" for his team--some things haven't changed. The sequence of getting past Chico at the door is classic Vaudeville. Unknown to Groucho, the opposing team has already hired the two players, and Groucho mistakenly recruits Chico and Harpo. Nobody said he was a bright president. Innumerable sight gags, fine slapstick, and lots of literary references hidden in the gags. Again not up to Duck Soup or A Day at the Races, but classic gems scattered throughout.

The Marx Brothers were the early equivalent of Robin Williams. They were as anarchistic in reality as their screen personae. Between their ad libbing and improvisation, directors and writers were grateful if any of their work survived. Perelman, in particular, was furious with them for shredding his carefully crafted dialog. (Pauline Kael Review, Microsoft Cinemania, 1995).

In the lake scene, a take off on An American Tragedy, Todd falls overboard, screams for help, and Groucho throws her a lifesaver (candy) and then paddles off. What does not show is that the screaming Todd was in real distress since she couldn't swim; Groucho thought she was just hamming it up. She had to be rescued by crew members (Pauline Kael Review, Microsoft Cinemania, 1995). (9-11-95) Beginning

Horseman On The Roof, The (1995) (**1/2, drama) (4-12-99) (D.-Jean-Paul Rappeneau; Juliette Binoche, Olivier Martinez, Pierre Arditi, Francois Cluzet, Jean Yanne) A slow, lush period piece set in 1832 France. A young Italian cavalry officer Angelo (Martinez) living in exile is working with the resistance to oust the Austrian overlords in Italy. Treachery leads to murder and flight. However, there is no place to hide as cholera scythes through the populace like piranha through a steer; fear and zealotry convert the rational into avenging mobs, and only the crows feast well on the dead and dying. A chance meeting of the young man and a noble woman Pauline de Theus: (Binoche) leads to a fateful trek across southern France.

Horseman shows with frightening realism the effects, physical and emotional, of plague on civilization, and the survival of human respect and emotions in spite of the stress, although the author takes considerable license with the symptoms and nature of cholera. Horseman has its own slow deliberate pace, and the actors are commensurably low key and reserved, although the ultimate nonphysical confrontation between the two males is sharp and believable. While not for the action crowd, Horseman makes for an entertaining evening as you try to anticipate the next twist, predict the eventual outcome, and revel in the absolutely stunning scenery.

Oh, I should mention. It is in French with subtitles. But they are excellent and you won't notice them after the first minute or two. Beginning

The Host aka Gwoemul (2006) (***, horror, comedy) (5-2-08) (D.-Joon-ho Bong; W: Chul-hyun Baek, Joon-ho Bong; Kang-ho Song, Hie-bong Byeon, Hae-il Park, Du-na Bae, Ah-sung Ko) Korea. A little Environmental Health and Safety unapproved waste disposal into Seoul's Han River. A few years later one of the most imaginative monsters in recent memory comes slithering out of the river to gallop after and feast on sightseers enjoying an, until now, otherwise beautiful day. We have a family including a young sister, a slacker brother, the father, the mother and the grandfather, who runs a food stand at the river. What precipitates the story is that the creature takes the daughter and the family tries to recover her.

To call the film quirky is to do it an injustice. Black humored. Satirical of the US and the Korean governments. Especially targeted is the seemingly endless skill of bureaucracies to ride roughshod over their citizens with narrow minded inefficiency.
Ultimately the film is about family, love, and sacrifice. Hell hath no fury like that of a family torn apart. Forewarned: like many Asian films it doesn't have a Hollywood ending. Incidentally, the English title is meaningless and has absolutely nothing to do with the plot. The Korean title apparently roughly translates as creature, which is a perfect description. The young girl does a stellar job in her role. Beginning

Hot Shots! (1991) (**1/2, humor) (D.-Jim Abrahams; Charlie Sheen, Cary Elwes, Valeria Golino, Lloyd Bridges, Kevin Dunn, Jon Cryer, William O'Leary, Kristy Swanson, Efrem Zimbalist, Jr., Bill Irwin, Judith Kahan, Pat Proft, Heidi Swedberg)Hot Shots! is a totally mindless blow away, but with some good parts. My wife said "It has everything in it but a whoopee cushion" ... pause ... "Actually it had one of those too." Lloyd Bridges does an outstanding role as a spaced out admiral. Beginning

Hot Shots Part Deux (1993) (***, humor) (D.-Jim Abrahams, Charlie Sheen, Lloyd Bridges, Valeria Golino, Brenda Baake) More Hot Shots! Love it or leave it. With the subtlety of Laurel and Hardy shredding an automobile, the Abrahams' crew impales countless movies and ads. How many can you find? Even the blind can see Casablanca, StarWars, Basic Instincts, Bloodsport, and Rambo. Sheen, a glistening oiled killing machine, is Topper Harley dragged from retirement in an Asian monastery to rescue hostages and their rescuers and their rescuers from Iraq. Golino is his off again, on again love interest. Bridges repeats his riotous role as Admiral, now President "God help the country", Benson, who is in a hotly contested reelection (Benson--The Simple Choice). His tree planting and rescue plan are gloriously moronic. The expedition is led by CIA's Michelle Rodham Huddleston (Baake). Mile a minute straight for the funny bone slapstick. If one misses, the next gets you between the eyes before you blink. Stick around for all credits, unless you haven't seen The Crying Game; they give away the secret. Juvenile, tasteless, funny. Enjoy. (6-21-93) Beginning

Hot Zone, The (1994) (****, book, fact) (Author: Richard Preston) Random House. Also, available in paperback from Anchor Book, Doubleday. The Hot Zone book is not for the squeamish. Asteroids (possibly responsible for the demise of the dinosaurs) are a spectacular way to go, but certainly not the only way for the world to end. As T. S. Elliot put it concering our termination, "Not with a bang, but with a whimper." Preston describes one such possible whimper.

Figuratively speaking, the Earth or at least the United States, had an asteroid sweep past Reston Virginia in October and November of 1989. If we are lucky, it was a near miss. If we weren't, it is now circling the sun for another go at us. The asteroid in this case was a virus in a monkey house. The Hot Zone tells the story of our nearly fatal brush with eternity. The virus in question is an extraordinarily near relative of Ebola Zaire, the most lethal form of the Ebola hemorragic viruses (90% mortality and given the enormous total body destruction, survival may be no blessing). The horrendous power of the Ebola virus was on exhibit again in Africa a few months ago. However, the Reston virus is transmitted in the traditional way through body fluids of the Ebola Zaire (the infected just liquify) and, additionally, through the air like flu and pneumonic plague.

Preston writes so well and tells his story in such an electrifying fashion that The Hot Zone rates as a superb horror book, except it isn't fiction. It is a page turner that kept me up many nights and continually elicited the emotion of terror. Anyone can do horror, but only an artist can raise the much more refined emotion of terror. Preston is an artist. He tells a fascinating intellectual story. However, to elicit terror, a writer or film director has to get past that impressive array of psychic defenses that we have developed to prevent being overwhelmed by terror. Preston slips past all our defenses, and, like a snapping turtle under a duck in murky water, rises up without warning, and seizes and drags down our thrashing emotional centers. If Preston ever writes a horror novel, I'm not sure I could take it.

Some of the riveting points were the slowness of the government's reactions, the interagency turf rivalries, and the obvious desire of those involved to cover their collective posteriors. In short, the bread and butter of all standard horror stories. Not that the agencies were really all that slow, but in retrospect and given the potential gravity of the situation, their behavior seems like flowing molasses in a Montana winter--and if you have never had the pleasure of 40 below, trust me; molasses isn't the only thing that doesn't move very fast. (8-8-95) Beginning

House on Haunted Hill, The (1958) (***, 50s horror) (2-12-01) (D.-William Castle: Vincent Price, Carol Ohmart, Richard Long, Alan Marshal, Carolyn Craig, Elisha Cook Jr., Julie Mitchum, Leona Anderson, Howard Hoffman) Not to be confused with the great The Haunting and the disastrous The Haunting. House is similar in that a group of people are paid to spend the night lock in an allegedly haunted house where 7 people have died violently. The survivors get paid $10K for 12 hours work. But living through the night is no easy manner as the four "guests" are treated to a macabre evening by the oily owner (Price) and his not so normal herself wife. Price is at the top of his suave, dangerous style.

Castle is the shlockmeister of 50s horror. He could take a mediocre idea, turn it into a so so horror film, and with clever marketing turn a profit. Castle was responsible for the gimmicks of taking out life insurance policies on the patrons in case of death from heart failure, nurses in the lobby and ambulances out front, buzzers under the seat to mimic the escaped brain eating tingler, and Emergo in House. Emergo was a skeleton that flew out over the audience at an appropriate place in the film.

House is classic Castle. Quirky dialogue and characters. Tacky plot with black edged humor. Not a great film, but a classic in its genre, and quite entertaining if you go into in the right frame of mind or just want to see how one of the great schlockmeister made a living. Review based on a TCM showing. Beginning

House on Haunted Hill (1999) (***, horror) (10-16-00) (D.-William Malone; Geoffrey Rush, Geoffrey Rush, Famke Janssen, Taye Diggs, Peter Gallagher Chris Kattan, Ali Larter, Bridgette Wilson, Jeffrey Combs, Dick Beebe, Slavitza Jovan) William Castle was the schlock meister of 50-60s horror. House is a remake of his classic of the same name with Vincent Price as the lead. Let’s not confuse great fun with art. House is fun (but don’t mistake this for not gory). It is well crafted, honors the tongue-in-cheek style of the original, throws a few curve balls (don’t think you know what is going to happen just because you watched the original), and manages a few jolts of its own. Millionaire Steven H. Price (Rush), an obvious allusion to the role played in the original by Vincent Price, throws a birthday party for his wife in a haunted house (actually a hospital for the criminally insane). Price has made his millions in glitzy amusement parks, terrifying rides, and flights of fancy. He sports a trophy wife, Evelyn (Janssen), whose primary love in life would be to see her very rich husband very dead. To pump up the evening, Price is offering his selected guests a total of $5,000,000 to those who survive the evening; when you ask your neighbors how they are feeling, it isn’t out of altruism.

The cast clearly has a great time hamming it up and reveling in the F/X and absurdity of the situation. Rush and Janssen are over the top and true delights to watch. The rest of the cast does a good job. While the film does fall into more conventional lines towards the end, it still manages a nice edge of black humor.

The review is based on the excellent letter boxed DVD, which has a delightful commentary by the director along with a fun series of comparison shots between the original and the remake. House is a must see for lovers of old horror films. Beginning

House of Games (1987) (****, drama) (D-David Mamet; Lindsay Crouse, Joe Mantegna, Mike Nussbaum) Mamet's directorial debut. A riveting tale of intrigue and deception written and directed by Mamet with many of his regulars. Most notable are the nasty little performances by Mantegna and Crouse. Mamet's wife, Crouse, is an uptight psychiatrist who gets mixed up with a very slick group of con artists. In keeping with the characters, nothing is what it seems to be, the psychiatrist is always trying to sort out what makes everyone tick as a way of understanding herself, and the mixture is as viciously an explosive brew as you are likely to encounter. We felt that the penultimate ending was gratuitous and not very believable given the personality, but why quibble over a delightful little black morality play? The ending was quite realistic. In case you don't know, you'll learn what a "tell" is. Beginning

House of the Flying Daggers (2004) (***, historical drama, martial arts, romance) (6-22-05) (D.- Zhang Yimou; Zhang Ziyi, Takeshi Kaneshiro, Andy Lau, Song Dandan) Set in the in the dying days of the Tang Dynasty, 859 A.D. we have a story of a group of rebels, The House of the Flying Daggers, and a pair of police officers (Kaneskhiro and Lau) trying to hunt them down using a blind, but definitely not helpless, woman (Ziyi). Comparisons with Hero are inevitable. Both are visually absolutely stunning with cinematography to die for—many do. It is a story of intrigue, love, betrayal and loss. Very Shakespearean. The fight scenes are exceptional with the echo dance in the opulent Peony Pavilion brothel and the fight in the bamboo forest being especially noteworthy. Unfortunately, for me Daggers lacks the subtle plot and the emotional depth of Hero. However, from a visual standpoint, Daggers is breathtaking. I saw it on a Chinese language DVD before it was released to the theaters, and only having detailed instruction on how to navigate the Chinese menus allowed us to watch the film with subtitles. So I don’t know what extras the current DVD has. In Mandarin with English subtitles. If you like action and visuals of extraordinary beauty and grace, give Daggers a look. If you want these, plus a stellar story, check out Hero.

House of Wax (1953) (**1/2, horror) (3-6-00) (D.-André De Toth; Vincent Price, Frank Lovejoy, Phyllis Kirk, Carolyn Jones, Paul Cavanagh, Charles Buchinsky (Bronson)) Delightfully tacky 50s style horror film. Price stars as sculptor who is mad as a hatter and owns a wax house of horrors. Jones is a hoot as an over the top flaky opportunist who chooses the wrong man to go out with. For those with a keen eye, she played the popular Morticia in "The Addams Family" TV series in the mid-60s. Another all but unrecognizable character is Charles Bronson. He is so young that I am not sure I would have recognized him without having seen his name on the cast.

House was one of the most popular 3-D films of the time. It shows its 3-D origins, especially in the paddle ball sequence. As an aside, the wax models were either amazingly well rendered or were actually amazingly still actors. The film has good fun with confusion of the wax and the living. Beginning

House Sitter (1992) (**1/2 Comedy) (D-Frank Oz; Steve Martin, Goldie Hawn) Currently at the Carmick 6. A totally off-the-wall comedy, where Martin builds a dream house as a surprise engagement gift for his girl friend who then dumps him. Months later on the rebound Martin has a one night stand with Hawn. To put it graciously, her descriptions of reality are imaginative. Unknown to him, she then moves into his house and passes herself off as his wife--after all, why waste a beautiful house? The madcap antics while everything gets sorted out are hectic, bizarre, and entertaining. You never know (indeed, you are afraid to find out) what fiction she will come up with next to cover a new situation that has arisen. While not great, it does have a rather frantic energy and some good belly laughs. Worth the good neighbor hour ($3.50), but not the $5.50 prime time. In an uncharacteristic role, Martin plays straight man to Hawn's well honed flake. Beginning

Hudsucker Proxy, The (1994) (***, comedy) (Produced and directed by the Coen brothers, Tim Robbins, Jennifer Jason Lee, Paul Newman) Coen brothers pretty much says it all. You either like or dislike their fractured style and world view. Not in the same league with Raising Arizona, but vintage Coen none the less. Let's just say that ruthless and spectacularly successful Hudsucker Industries is in need of a new president. The Machiavellian second in command, delightfully played by Newman, feels that this is an opportunity for management to clean up. You don't see the sign, but Newman must surely have one saying "I'd drive my car over my mother for power, glory and money at Hudsucker. Actually, make that a truck--a big truck." The board decides to sell their stock, make it appear worthless by installing a total imbecile as president, buy it back for a song after the collapse, and then get rich and control the company by eliminating the ersatz president. Robbins, a recent busness graduate, falls into the presidency. To call him clueless would be a disservice. It is worse, much worse. On the other hand, he does have a certain innate talent that Newman overlooks, which brings the whole thing to crisis. Throw in Leigh, a diamond hard Pullitzer award winning reporter, who smells a rat and goes undercover to see just what is going on at Hudsucker. After the guileless Robbins takes her on as his secretary, respect, romance, and intrigue follow. Leigh does a great Katherine Hepburn imitation, although my wife, a pathological Hepburn fan, found it grating after a while. Sly, nasty, black humored with truly off the wall visuals so characteristic of the Coens. If nothing else, you will never forget a couple of scenes in the board room. (7-7-94) Beginning

Humor Canadian Style

Notice posted in Toronto motel (1993):

Ontario Innkeepers Act

Paragraph 62-509

Section 4 Limitation of Innkeeping Liability

(1) No innkeeper is liable to make good to any guest of his inn any loss or injury to goods bought to his inn, not being a horse or other live animal or any gear appertaining thereto, or a carriage, to a greater amount than the sum of $40 except... [Courtesy of David Demas]

Humor (New Mexico Style)

Sign outside gift shop and snack bar at White Sands National Moument:

Microwave in Use

No Pets Allowed

One cringes at the fate of any loose pets. (5-15-95) Beginning

Humoresque (1946) (***, drama) (3-04-03) (D.- Jean Negulesco; Joan Crawford, John Garfield, Oscar Levant, J. Carrol Naish, Craig Stevens, Tom D'Andrea, Peggy Knudsen, Paul Cavanagh) A story of obsession and its consequences. “Nothing comes free. One way or the other you pay.” Boray (Garfield) is a prodigy violinist from a working class family. Via drive, determination and the support of his driven mother, he has risen to a level where he is prepared to make it big if he has a sponsor and money. Oh yes he also has an attitude problem; he makes no concessions to lesser mortals. He lusts after recognition, but is unwilling or unable to suppress his own ego long enough to get it. “I don’t go to concerts. When they are good, I am jealous. When they are bad, I am bored.” Through the connections of his pianist friend and guardian angel played by Levant, he is introduced to Helen (Davis). Davis is rich and bored. Boray’s arrogance and consummate skill attracts her. “Bad manners. The pure sign of talent.” This leads to a three way triangle with Boray obsessed with his music and not overly sensitive to how he gets there, Helen’s obsession with Boray, and Boray’s mother’s obsession with promoting her son’s careers without a clear understanding of how the system works, but a crystal clear understanding of her own moral values.

The story is set to the extraordinary beautiful violin work performed by Isaac Stern. The story is a morality play where the dangers of trying to interfere with the drive of a genius are amply portrayed. The performances are well rendered with Garfield at his abrasive self centered best and Davis as a woman searching for redemption. Levant is stellar as the friend, a man of great talent himself, but one who can bend with and manipulate the system. It also appears that he does all his own piano work.

Garfield did not do any of his violin work. His hands were tied to his side while a violinist did all the playing around him. All his acting was with his chin and face. When you watch the movie you cannot believe this.

The film has ample opportunity for discussion of the morality of what you saw and what will happen next. It lacks the pat Hollywood ending. As beautiful as the music was, however, I feel that they let the pieces go on too long for the efficient telling of the story.

Review based on the recent TMC showing of a stellar print with a commentary and brief interview of Garfield’s daughter by Robert Osborne beforehand. Beginning

Hurricane, The (1937) (***, romance, adventure) (D.-John Ford, Dorothy Lamour, Jon Hall, Mary Astor, Thomas Mitchell) Standard schmaltzy thirties, forties plot. On idyllic Polynesian island, boy gets girl, boy loses girl due to corrupt legal system, boy finally escapes, boy gets girl. Then, all their problems and everyone and everything else are swept away by the most awesome storm to ever ravage the silver screen. Matlin says "Climactic hurricane effects have never been equaled." Yeah, yeah, yeah. By '37 standards, probably great, but not now. Wrong! I can sum up the storm in one sentence: Climactic hurricane effects have never been equaled. You keep asking yourself, how did they manage to find a real island that they knew was going to be swept away and get set up to film it in time? Because baby, these just cannot be models. Man's insignificance in the face of nature's unbridled fury is absolutely, frighteningly, and with apparently perfect fidelity, captured. The plot is so-so, although watchable because of attractive characters and beautiful scenery. The most intriguing character is the French magistrate with his interesting sense of honor and duty. Even if you cannot watch the movie, stick in there for the storm. You will not be able to look at a hurricane on a weather map ever again without these images screaming through your mind like a force 5 storm. Academy Award: Sound. (2-15-93) Beginning

Hush (1998) (*, thriller) (12-25-00) (D.-Jonathan Darby; W.-Jonathan Darby; Jessica Lange, Gwyneth Paltrow, Johnathon Schaech, Nina Foch, Debi Mazar, Kaiulani Lee, David Thornton, Hal Holbrook) New York professional Helen (Paltrow) goes home with her beau, Jackson Baring (Schaech), to meet his mother, Martha (Lange), at the beautiful southern horse farm Kilronan. However, dear old Mom is not the charming host she first appears but a manipulative, controlling sociopath. Helen is in for a rough ride. Not since some of the overheated melodramas of the 50s and 60s have we been treated to such an illogical, poorly developed thriller. The film borrows (steals is more accurate) from countless other films. This is forgivable if done competently with style and imagination, but this is not true of Hush. There is no tension. The plot is so predictable that the audience pretty much knows it from the first ten minutes. Except the ending, however, which is so ridiculous as to be insulting. Why would even the obviously demented Martha keep such an incriminating piece of evidence in such a place? How can the terminally dumb (and Oedipal) Jackson manage to cover three hours of travel in minutes to get there in time to save his beloved? Don’t ask. The editing isn’t even imaginative, interesting, or coherent. The end is set to a juxtaposition of a horse race against what is happening at Kilronan, but with a total lack of relevance, coherence or tension. Other directors have used this ploy to good effect, so I guess the director just threw it in.

I will give you the one piece of real suspense in the entire film. From the opening moment, even before we saw the columned Kilronan, my wife and I knew the film was shot in Virginia. But where? It looks a lot like Albemarle or the horse country over by Gordonsville. I’ll save you almost two hours of boredom and a rental fee. Orange County Virginia is given in the credits. The town might be Orange, but I am not familiar enough with it to know.

I would be remiss in not mentioning that some people did enjoy the film. Especially Lange’s over the top mother-in-law from Hell performance. We didn’t. You were warned. Beginning