Thursday, January 30, 2020

INTERVIEW WITH ACTOR DAVID ZOOEY HALL

Today I have the great pleasure of welcoming a very special guest, actor David Zooey Hall, to CINEMATIC REVELATIONS for an interview. David has acted in various motion pictures and television series over the years, most notably in feature films THE YOUNG ANIMALS (1968), FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES (1971) [My review of the film can be found here] I DISMEMBER MAMA (1972), HIT (1973) and 99 and 44/100% DEAD! (1974), to name a few examples. David will be discussing his role in FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES, acting, jazz music, and his teaching position in The Actor’s Sanctuary, a school for aspiring actors. 
Welcome to CINEMATIC REVELATIONS David!

Athan: When did you first realize that you wanted to be an actor?
David: I think it was there from the beginning. Weekends as a child, my brothers, sister, cousins and I ( 10 to 15 of us) would get together and go see movies. And then afterward we’d try to recreate the films we’d seen. The fun we had made an indelible impression.

* 
Athan: Where did you study acting? 
David: In Los Angeles. With Jeff Corey, Charles Conrad & Donna Gerard. The teacher from whom I learned the most though was Gordon Hunt. He was the Casting Director at The Mark Taper Forum located @ The Music Center in Los Angeles.  Also a Director (Theatre and Voice over). His daughter is the actor Helen Hunt. I enrolled in his class to continue studying Acting. Which led me into Directing, Writing, and then Teaching.  At one point Gordon was asked by a playwright whose first play he had directed, to direct that writer’s newest play. He wasn’t available because he was directing another play, and he suggested the writer contact me, which he did. We met and he offered me his play to direct. Some of the other students in class had been asking me to direct some of the work they were putting up in class, and I’d been doing that, but I’d not really thought about directing, per se. I asked Gordon to fill me in on what I’d be taking on to direct a play and he replied: “You’re already doing in class what’ll be required of you as a Director.” So, I agreed to direct the play. It was well received. One of the folks who saw it was the head of a Playwriting Group, who was also a playwright. He asked me to direct a play he had recently written. I read it, found it interesting, and agreed to direct it. The results were such that he began sending me a great many of the scripts from his writing unit. None of which I was interested in directing. Which then prompted me to begin writing my own first effort as a playwright: “Taproot.” Written in Gordon’s  class. My intention when I finished  the play was to find a theatre where I could get it produced and also direct it. I submitted the play to the Cast Theatre in Hollywood, at the time the most successful Equity Waiver theatre in Hollywood. Out of fourteen hundred submissions the year it was submitted, “Taproot” was one of seven plays chosen that year for a Main Stage production. When I told Ted Schmidt, the Artistic Director the of the Cast Theatre and Diana Gibson ( the Dramaturge ) that I  was  also interested in directing the play, they told me they already had a director in mind for it and that the play would be produced at the Cast only if I agreed to play the lead role. I wanted the play to be produced, and The Cast Theatre had a great reputation and following, so I agreed to act in it. When the director they chose left the production shortly after it opened to direct another play, I took over the direction myself and redirected the play according to the way I had originally intended it be performed. “Taproot” was extended three times beyond its originally scheduled run. The play was then submitted to the Landmark Red Barn Theatre in Pittsburgh which was looking for an original play for their upcoming season, and “Taproot” was selected. After it opened in Pittsburgh I was contacted regarding having it produced in New York City.

Shortly after this Gordon Hunt asked me if I’d be interested in working with actors who were on a waiting list to enter his class? I told him I didn’t think I was interested in teaching. He suggested I give it some thought. I did and decided I’d give it a try. Soon the class expanded beyond Mr. Hunt’s waiting list to include other actors interested in joining the class. Then I quit teaching to spend six months in New York. When I returned to Los Angeles I resumed the class. This time it doubled in size. Again, about a year and a half later I was asked to return to NYC to look into business contacts there. This time I was gone a year. During that year I discovered I missed Teaching.  And decided that if any of the students who were in the class when I  left, had waited for me to resume the class after a year, I’d continue the class as long as there was an interest in my doing that. The Actors Sanctuary continues up to the present time.
*

Athan: I found your performance in FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES a spellbinding viewing experience. How did you become involved in this project?


David: I was flown up to Quebec City, Canada to audition for the role of Rocky. I had heard there had been casting sessions for the role in Hollywood, New York City and London, and that at the moment there was “No Rocky.” There were four leads in the film. All but the role of Rocky had been cast and were in rehearsals for two weeks, when I arrived. I’d read the script on the plane to Quebec City. When I arrived at the prison which was to be the location for the film, I read with Wendell Burton (who played Smitty in the film) for the role of Rocky. And was offered the role. After the audition, the folks in the room during the audition left to continue their duties elsewhere and I was left with the one of the producers, Lester Persky, who asked me if I was aware of the nudity that would be required for the rape scene between Smitty and Rocky? I responded that I had read the script on the plane and hadn’t seen any indication of that in the script. He said that aspect of the film was yet to be implemented into the script, and that it was integral to the film. I placed the script back on Mr. Persky’s desk and started to leave the room. As I got to the door he asked me where I was going and I told him: “I’m returning to Los Angeles. I’m not going to do your film.” I then called for a cab and was waiting for it out on the entrance steps to the prison when Mr. Persky came out and said to me: “Don’t leave…we’ll find a way to work things out.” He handed the script back to me. I took it ,and decided a short meeting with Wendell Burton might be the next order of business.

* 
Athan: What was it like filming FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES in Canada, in which seemed to be a very cold winter? 
David: Yes, at one point it was twenty five below zero. I ended up in the Hospital on three different occasions (lacerated hand, head wound, ruptured kidney / kidney stone). The first night after I was cast in the film I asked to spend the night in one of the prison cells. A long night in which I had a dream in which I was incarcerated &  living for one thing    escape. The film began shooting in late October. And continued for the next four and a half months. As the Holiday season approached, I read in a newspaper that the worst time for someone in prison was Christmas. The film was to break for two weeks over Christmas and New Year. I‘d been receiving invitations from folks working on the film to spend Christmas with them, which I’d declined, without knowing exactly why. And then It hit me that I’d never have a better chance to find out if what I had read in the newspaper about Christmas being the worst time for someone incarcerated was true or not. I decided to find out. The film had shut down for the holidays, and everyone connected with it had scattered except for Security personnel at the prison. On the late afternoon of December 24, I took a cab to the Prison entrance and asked the Security Guard on duty who spoke in broken English to be let into one of the Solitary Confinement cells which were located two floors beneath the main floor of the prison. I showed my identification card verifying that I was one of the actors in the film being shot there, and asked the guard to let me out on Christmas Day. I also asked to be locked into the cell, with just a pillow, blanket, and container of water. Which is all a prisoner in Solitary confinement is allowed. The Guard said I’d be let out on Christmas Day, as I requested. After his shift ended that night I found out later he went off to a ski resort to celebrate Christmas with his family, and forgot he had locked someone into one of the cells. Two and a half days later he remembered and called the guard who had replaced him on Christmas Eve and told him one of the actors in the film was locked in one of the Solitary confinement cells and needed to be released immediately.  Christmas morning, expecting to be released, I had waited until the dime holes in the prison door began to darken that mid afternoon on Christmas Day, before calling out to be released. Did that until I had no voice. Did that until I literally began to fear for my life. What had begun as a bit of research for a role I was portraying became along the way, in some of the moments I experienced - a nightmare.


I ran out of water during the first night, and the fact that I had nothing to drink for the next two and a half days and nights caused me several weeks later to develop a kidney stone. That happened while I was spending ten days in a hospital recovering from a kidney I had ruptured in a fight scene for the film. All my remaining scenes, including the rape scene, were pushed back to the end of the shooting schedule.
*
Athan: You and Wendell Burton shared an intense connection as Rocky and Smitty in FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES. What was it like filming these complex, multi-dimensional scenes in the film as part of an acting ensemble? 

David: Immediately after my being cast as Rocky, and then following the conversation with Lester Persky about the nudity in the film, I met with Wendell Burton and told him that after my conversation with Lester Persky that I was pretty sure that the film had been sold to M-G-M on the condition that it would be the first time the male sex act was to be graphically depicted in a film produced by a major motion picture studio. And that Persky had indicated to me that the rape scene we were to film together would require total nudity. I asked Wendell if he’d been told this? He said he hadn’t. I asked him how he felt about it? He said nobody had said anything to him. Then added: “ I sure as Hell wouldn’t want my grandmother seeing me doing something like that onscreen!” I then said to him: “I know we’ve just met, but I’ve got an idea…if you don’t mind me throwing something into the mix?” He said: “Not at all – shoot.” I said “Let’s tell the producers (Lester Persky and Lewis Allen) and the director (Jules Schwerin) that we’re fine with doing the rape scene but want to have it pushed back two or three weeks to get a feel for the film, for working together, and to establish the relationship between the two characters we’re portraying. And if we can do that, by the time we get to the rape scene there will be several weeks of film already shot and in the can and we might be able to exert some pressure to have the scene filmed in a way we’re  both comfortable with. And if they're not open to this - we can flat out refuse to do the scene. And we'll see what happens then." Wendell enthusiastically agreed to this, and that became the plan. 

When the day arrived to film the rape scene Lester Persky asked to meet with Wendell and I before filming was to begin that morning and said that the Rape scene scheduled for this day was to be filmed in total nudity for both Rocky and Smitty. To which both Wendell and I both responded: “We’re not going to do it that way.” Persky then called the director Jules Schwerin in to join him in the meeting he was having with us and we repeated to him what we had said to Persky. Production immediately came to a halt. M-G-M, the studio producing the film was contacted, and Herb Solow (Head of Production for M-G-M) flew to the Prison and met with the producers, and the director of the film. That meeting resulted in the director (Mr. Schwerin) being fired and replaced by Harvey Hart. Once  the new director was in place, the meetings ended, and Mr. Solow returned to M-G-M. Before beginning filming Harvey Hart asked to meet with Wendell Burton and I. When we got together he asked us how we saw the film but before answering his question, Wendell and I had a question for him: We asked if he thought the film had been “green lighted” because of the potential it contained to exploit the sexual element of prison life? He said “Yes.” And then he added that not being able to deliver that particular element of the film was the reason Jules Schwerin had been fired. Wendell and I both said neither of us wanted to make that kind of film.  Harvey then said that since the sexual element was a part of prison life, that some of it would have to be in the film, but that he was also against it being the central element of the film, or sensationalizing it. He also said that he thought we could make a more honest film without exploiting the sex angle and that he wanted to make the same kind of film that it sounded to him that we were interested in making. He ended the meeting with: “Fellahs – let’s make the film WE want to make. If M-G-M doesn’t like what we’re doing – they can fire me, too.” To that end he decided to scrap what had been filmed before he came aboard and reshot the film entirely. From that moment on filming “Fortune And Men’s Eyes “ became for me - a creative adventure.
* 

Athan: What did you most enjoy about the experience of filming FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES?


David: Sometimes I think - just surviving it. John Herbert had written the play. And it appeared that in the shooting script I received after my audition, that the character of Rocky had remained completely unchanged from the original theatre production, while the other three lead characters had all evolved, been developed and adapted to make the transition from stage to screen. The day I was cast in the film I was asked to participate in a “ table read “ of the script. And found the character of Rocky  saddled with dialogue that was antiquated, superfluous, dated. I asked to get as much of it removed as possible. Jules Schwerin, the first director of the film, allowed me to do the first couple of scenes he filmed of me as Rocky improvising my own dialogue instead of using what was in the script. After he saw the dailies of what he had shot, and heard the dialogue I had improvised, he allowed me to continue doing that.  When Harvey Hart took over directing the film he told me that when he had first read the script, he had noticed the dialogue for Smitty, Queenie and Mona all sounded contemporary and natural, but that Rocky’s dialogue: “sounded like something out of a film about the “Dead End Kids.” He also said that “When I saw the dailies of what had been shot, I noticed you weren’t saying what was in the script, that you were improvising your own dialogue as well as some of the action, and what I heard and saw  -  rang true to me. And that’s when I decided that once we began to work together, I’d let you continue to do exactly what you were doing.” And that’s pretty much what happened once we began to work together. When a scene was scheduled that I was in, he’d come into my room before filming was to begin and ask “What happens to Rocky now? Where does he go, what does he do next, and what’s the action that takes place?” I’d give him my thoughts. He’d listen and we proceeded from there. Once I told Harvey what I thought Rocky might do next, he’d ask me: “Where do you think is going to be the best place to put the camera, and how many cameras are going to be needed to cover this next scene the way you want to play it?”  He allowed me complete freedom to improvise not only my dialogue but the action of my character in every scene I was in, and this is how we continued to work together for the remainder of the film.  This kind of creative freedom wasn’t something I had asked for. Harvey said that after watching the dailies, he just had the feeling that this would simply be the best way for he and I to work together. It was a way of working together - determined by necessity. It wasn’t until Harvey Hart came onboard as director of the film that I began to feel as though I might have someone in the production of the film that I could trust.
*
Athan: What impact did acting in FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES have on yourself as a person? 


David: It validated my interest in taking risks as an actor. As well as my desire to have my work as an actor be – of service to others. On the plane to Quebec City I remember, as I was reading the script, feeling as though “ I was being called out, ” in terms of the kind of actor I would be: conventional (meaning safe) or otherwise, in terms of the roles I was willing to take on. I remember thinking: “What’ll I do if I’m offered the role of Rocky - a character from another part of the forest than I’m  familiar with?” What came to me then was that perhaps, if the film itself were to be handled in a certain way, it could possibly shed light on certain elements of the prison system that desperately needed – change –   that might bring about helpfulness and healing instead of inflicting damage and addiction to a life of crime - on those incarcerated. This seemed to me to be a worthwhile reason to involve myself with the film. I found myself too, at that moment, looking for someone whose acting career might be an example for me of how to manage my own career in the face of the particular challenge that seemed to be presenting itself to me – and found no one. I remember feeling that the step I am about to take creatively…professionally, is one I’m going to have to take – alone. It really wasn’t until some years later that the example I’d looked for on “Fortune” - suddenly appeared, when I saw Tom Hanks in the motion picture “Philadelphia.”  He played a gay man dying of Aids and won the Academy Award that year for Best Performance by an Actor for his work in the film. I remember watching the film and feeling : “There it is – the Permission I’d wished I’d had on “Fortune - that was non-existent at that time. After seeing that film I thought to myself: “ Actors are free now! To play whatever kinds of roles are offered to them, whatever kinds of roles they may create or seek to bring to life - whatever kinds of roles their talent may be inspired to reach for.”


Personally, when “Fortune And Men’s Eyes” opened, the feedback that my performance as Rocky in the film generated that meant the most to me – came from my fellow actors. Intuitively perhaps, on some level they may have sensed the chance I’d taken by accepting the role of Rocky, whether I had succeeded or not – to strike out on a path where there did not seem to be at that time – another traveler.


*

Athan: Did filming FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES make you see jail and the prisoners who live in these facilities in a different light than you first imagined?

David: No, because I had read about the prison system. But it brought the loss of my own freedom home to me in a more personal way because of the couple of accidents that happened to me along the way of making the film.
*
Athan: Have you kept in contact with any cast members and crew from FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES?


David: No. Unfortunately, Wendell Burton, Michael Greer, Harvey Hart and both Producers Lewis Allen and Lester Persky are no longer with us. A couple of years after the film  had opened, Wendell, with whom I had always got along well, invited me to his first wedding, which took place in Griffith Park in Los Angeles. It was a lovely ceremony. Shortly after that Wendell and his wife moved out of California. I never saw them again. I heard later he had become a “Born Again Christian:” performing Christian music concerts, recording & touring.

*
Athan: Are you still recognized today for your role in FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES? 

David: Yes. Quite honestly and it’s just one person’s opinion: because M-G-M did not get exactly the kind of film they anticipated when they purchased the rights to film it, they never had a clue as to how to promote it. The very week that “Fortune And Men’s Eyes” opened, the Attica Prison Riot occurred (1971). That kind of coincidence or synchronicity might have been a gold mine in the hands of another motion picture studio than M-G-M. A couple of years later, I went to Europe on a film. Prior to that I had had no real idea of how powerfully the film had resonated with the public internationally until I began shooting in France, and then Italy. In Italy I learned that huge crowds had swarmed all the venues there where the film had played, because the Italian public knew that the Catholic Church would do everything in its power to get the film banned as soon as it could after it opened, wherever it opened. I heard too, that wherever it had played in Europe, it had caused a sensation.
*
Athan: Just out of interest, but are you left-handed? I noticed that in FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES you did many things this way, such as eating and throwing items. Being left-handed, I like to see which actors are the same.


David: Yes, I’m a Southpaw.
*
Athan: Of all your movies, which was your personal favorite movie acting role? 
David: Fortune And Men’s Eyes.
*
Athan: You have been teaching acting to students for many years now in THE ACTOR’S SANCTUARY. What gives you the most satisfaction about teaching the art of acting to students? 
David: A couple of things: In order to conduct The Actors Sanctuary I’ve found I must continue studying, learning, growing, too. Otherwise I have nothing to give. Also: if someone comes to me asking me for help, and if there is some way I may be able to offer that, well, just speaking for myself - what else am I living for? The best teacher it seems to me – is life itself. My favorite kind of acting looks like - life, and not like “acting.” I hesitate to use the word Teacher referring to myself. It’s dishonest in my opinion. Because I consider myself a student: first, foremost, lastly. There is a certain kind of satisfaction in guiding, encouraging and simply working with others. And hopefully, watching them grow. Another satisfaction is hearing from one of the students that something we’ve worked on together in class has helped them in an audition or in a role they have been hired to perform.
*
Athan: What attracted you to jazz music and performing this for audiences? 
David: The vulnerability of being in the moment, with nothing to hide behind (sheer terror when one begins that particular journey). Exactly the same “calling” that resides at the center of a certain kind of acting. Acting and Singing I find to be interrelated. And it’s why we do both in The Actors Sanctuary. It’s impossible to hide from the camera. Same for a singer in front of a live audience. I’m not sure this will make any sense, but I’ll give it a shot anyway: to me now -  being completely alone feels to me to be pretty much the same experience as acting in front of a camera or singing in front of a live audience. Once it didn’t. Now it does. I don’t know why.
*
Athan: Have you released a CD of your music? 
David: Not formally. But I’ve recorded a CD. A live recording of the second Jazz gig I was hired for: “David Hall: Live @ Geri’s Jazz World.”
*
Thank you so much today for your time David, and for the fascinating insight you have provided into the art of acting, film, FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES, and jazz music. It has been wonderful to have you on CINEMATIC REVELATIONS. You are welcome to return whenever you wish.
*

Sunday, January 26, 2020

DOCTORS' WIVES (1971)



Title: DOCTORS' WIVES

Year of Release: 1971

Director: George Schaefer

Genre: Drama

Synopsis: When flirty, promiscuous Lorie Dellman is shot dead by doctor husband Mort after finding her in flagrante with his colleague, this is the impetus for the other doctors' wives to take stock of their lives and marriages.

Within a film history context: Films about doctors and their personal lives have often been featured over the years. One of the very first to showcase a doctor and his wife was an unrelated film with the exact same title of DOCTORS' WIVES (1931). Directed by Frank Borzage, renowned for his romance films, it centres upon a doctor and his wife, the husband's long hours as a practitioner causing problems in his marriage. One of the next films to deal with a doctor and his wife was the British MGM film THE CITADEL (1938). While it retained some of the flavour of the novel, its tragic ending was watered-down for its cinematic adaptation, with Rosalind Russell lending a more emancipated rendition of the wife than the novel offered. Other films with a doctor and his wife were as varied in tone as the years progressed.

THE DOCTOR TAKES A WIFE (1940), helmed by Alexander Hall, put a different spin on the doctor-wife theme, with a female author becoming involved with a doctor, with farcical results. Vincente Minnelli's MADAME BOVARY (1949) was about a doctor's wife who indulged in an extravagant lifestyle, and in adulterous liaisons. DOCTOR ZHIVAGO (1965) directed by David Lean, had a married physician who fell in love with another woman in the Russia of the 1910s. DOCTORS' WIVES, on the other hand, spotlighted not only one doctor-wife pairing but five, making it a multi-character narrative. It also differed from the other films with its racy tone, turning the more subdued mood of the other films on their heads. Much more satirical and risqué in content than the other doctor-wife movies, DOCTORS' WIVES distinguished itself in this genre with its frank treatment of sexuality, which was often more comic, and dialogue-based, than openly erotic in nature.

Overview: George Schaefer directed only five feature films in his career, beginning with crime drama PENDULUM (1969), comedies GENERATION (1969) and  ONCE UPON A SCOUNDREL (1973), and ending with the drama AN ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE (1978). Mr Schaefer, though, directed a multitude of telemovies which were as diverse in content as his motion pictures, with comedy, drama and fantasy some of the genres he tackled. DOCTORS' WIVES was his third motion picture, and the film for which he is generally best known.

An adaptation of Frank Slaughter's book of the same name, DOCTORS' WIVES explores the lives of five doctors and their wives, particularly their private lives, and how events in these spill over into their public lives, many times with disastrous results. While the film's plot and much of the action could be classified as being lurid or salacious in nature, the director has successfully made a movie which effortlessly transitions from event to event, and from marriage to marriage, in an entertaining and in many instances, thought-provoking manner.

The movie's merry-go-round of musical beds and relationships affords the actors ample opportunities to emote, and they make the material even better than what it would have sounded on paper. Many raucous moments ensue in DOCTORS' WIVES which are too delicious, and performed with such gusto, that they deserve mention. One of these is where one of the wives challenges the others that she will bed each and every one of the other wives' husbands, a saucy opening that primes the viewer for more raunchiness down the line. Others such as the PhD student who tape records encounters with her amours, and the lusty male intern who has his eye on all the doctors' wives, are, in all honesty, over the top, but they work. The film in some ways resembled an American dramatic version of the British CARRY ON movies, with their headstrong bawdiness on display for all to relish. Where the CARRY ON series utilized innuendo and double entendre instead of straight talk, DOCTORS' WIVES differed in that discussion of sexual matters was more forthright than the comedy series. DOCTORS' WIVES, though, is not all hijinks without credibility.

Mr Schaefer balances the humorous moments with more serious scenes, and the result gels remarkably well as a whole. Witnessing the crumbling marriages of the doctors, and watching them and their wives trying to make the best of matters but always making mistakes, is honest, investing what may have seemed one-dimensional characters with realism. The Machiavellian schemes of malevolent Doctor Mort Dellman, the tenuous, love-hate Randolph marriage, Doctor Peter Brennan's attraction to his African-American nurse, and the tragi-comic marriage of the Hays, stand out in particular in DOCTORS' WIVES. In summing up this movie, the main objective of DOCTORS' WIVES appears to be sheer escapist entertainment, but, in its case, with many edifying and thoughtful moments which add depth, and resonance, to the proceedings.

Acting: This is a film in which the entire cast perform admirably, with no miscasts or shallow acting. The most striking, but brief acting performance in DOCTORS' WIVES is that of Dyan Cannon. In the space of only a few minutes, Miss Cannon projects such verve, such clarity in her role of a nymphomaniac doctors wife that it is disappointing how her role comes to an end so quickly, but her cameo is nevertheless thoroughly effective, kicking off the film's drama. As her husband, John Colicos is alternately evil, grasping, scheming, righteous, but very watchable. While his actions are reprehensible, he is able to impart a small shred of understanding from the audience through his actions. Ralph Bellamy, star of classic Hollywood films lends a sympathetic but weighty presence as Miss Cannon's practical, moral father. His scenes with both John Colicos and especially, Richard Crenna, explore many sides of the emotional spectrum without ever becoming hysterical. Several other actors also shine in DOCTORS' WIVES in a film which could be well described as an ensemble piece.

Richard Crenna is fine as stalwart Doctor Peter Brennan, probably the most grounded of all the doctors. His dilemma between staying married to wife Amy, and his attraction to nurse Helen, is handed admirably by Mr Crenna. It is easy to see why he is so conflicted with both women bringing out a different side of him in the movie. Janice Rule is delicious as Amy Brennan, both her quiet seething, and icy line readings excellent, and reaction to Nurse Helen showing a more vulnerable side to the character. Diana Sands gives a sensitive, moving performance as Nurse Helen, showing pain and despair without ever seeming pathetic. Other supporting roles have been well-furnished in the production, the director also eliciting great performances from his other actors.

Anthony Costello is just right as the male intern cum gigolo who entertains the doctors' wives, and other women, with his ingratiating and sometimes seedy charm. Kristina Holland is delightful as the PhD medical student with more than study on her mind, with a soft voice and sassiness rounding out a fun performance. Cara Williams is witty, earthy, and exudes glamour as the wife of Carroll O'Connor, her long eyelashes and dead-pan stare speaking volumes without having to utter dialogue in many scenes. Carroll O'Connor perfectly matches Miss Williams with his pragmatic, and slightly melancholy nature utilized to sound effect in DOCTORS' WIVES, as the most humorous of the husbands. Rachel Roberts contributes what is probably the most compelling of all the performances in the film. Her Della Randolph is fierce, vituperative, needy, loving, pensive, helpless at times, but utterly watchable. A forceful actress who always got to the heart of her characters, and painted vivid portraits of flawed but very real human beings, Rachel Roberts' scenes in the film are one of the top features of DOCTORS' WIVES.

Soundtrack: The soundtrack of DOCTORS' WIVES is subtle and quite spare, but this is standard for many films of the early 1970s. The opener consists of a doctor and his wife seen through a translucent screen, with the theme piano music playing in the background, highlighting the intimate and revealing nature of what is taking place on screen. There is also the use of Cass Eliot's theme song in the scene with Dyan Cannon and John Colicos which is reflective of Miss Cannon's character, and what is to take place in the film later. This piece is also utilized at the film's conclusion which ties up the events in a logical fashion. Instrumental variations of the opening theme are played at other important moments in the film, such as Della's revelations to husband Dave, and also at the country club segment where some of the wives hear news over the radio.

Mise-en-scene: The production values of DOCTORS' WIVES are of a very high standard, a key feature of films produced by Mike Frankovich. From the luxuriously appointed homes of the doctors, in particular the plush residence of Doctor Dave Randolph and wife Della, the elaborate and well-equipped hospital set, to the many outdoor sequences such as Della playing golf at the county club, the producers have not skimped on the visual aspects of the film. The sets and backgrounds are both easy on the eyes but also, add drama and place the lives of the characters into context, reflecting well-to-do doctors and their personal, and private activities.

The costuming is another facet of the film which serves it well, designed by Moss Mabry. The wardrobe for the female characters is appropriately understated for everyday wear, but the initial scenes in the club present the doctors wives in beautiful garments that are not over the top, and suit the actresses in question. The doctors themselves wear expensive suits that again are well-tailored and suitable for the male actors, giving them an upscale appearance in keeping with the tone and presentation of the film. There is also the subtle inference that while the doctors live in well-to-do homes and wear expensive wardrobes, that their messy and scandalous private lives are in contrast to glossy surface appearances.

Award-worthy performances in my opinion: Dyan Cannon, John Colicos, Richard Crenna, Diana Sands, Janice Rule, Ralph Bellamy, Anthony Costello, Kristina Holland, Cara Williams, Carroll O'Connor, Rachel Roberts.

Suitability for young viewers: No. Male nudity, female nudity, adult themes, graphic depiction of surgical operation.

Overall Grade: B

Link: IMDB Page

Movie Excerpt



Tuesday, January 7, 2020

FORTUNE AND MEN'S EYES (1971)


Title: FORTUNE AND MEN'S EYES

Year of Release: 1971

Director: Harvey Hart

Genre: Drama

Synopsis: A naïve young man is sentenced to six months in jail for a crime, witnessing prison horrors first hand, but becomes corrupt, and pays the price for his change in nature.

Within a film history context: Films which have been set in jail or in detention, featuring male prisoners are a cinematic staple over the course of film history. One of the earliest examples is Mervyn LeRoy's I AM A FUGITVE FROM A CHAIN GANG (1932) with its depiction of a wrongly-accused man and his inhumane treatment in a chain gang. Further films with a prison theme include Don Siegel's RIOT IN CELL BLOCK H (1954) with its prison riot storyline. Similar to this, though more explicit in its violence was Buzz Kulik's formidable RIOT (1969). More notable films with a prison setting include Alan Parker's moody MIDNIGHT EXPRESS (1978), with its intimation of homosexuality in jail, and Alan Clarke's SCUM (1979) which was centred around a juvenile detention centre.

FORTUNE AND MEN'S EYES, as with the other films from the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, but unlike I WAS A FUGITVE FROM A CHAIN GANG, did not feature prisoners being forced into hard labour, instead just inhabiting their cells. Where the film diverged from the other examples was in its intimate portrayal of the four prisoners, and how they reacted not only to each other but also, to their enforced detention. It also had explicit homosexual overtones and depicted male rape which the other films only touched upon, with the exception of sexual violence in SCUM. On the other hand, FORTUNE AND MEN'S EYES could be said to be more tightly character-driven in nature, and its violence was not as detailed as the later MIDNIGHT EXPRESS.

Overview: Harvey Hart was a Canadian-born director who made eleven features in his career, beginning with BUS RILEY'S BACK IN TOWN (1965), and concluding with UTILITIES (1983). Mr Hart had a reputation for tackling challenging subjects through his filmmaking, variously exploring topics such as older man/younger woman relationships in BUS RILEY'S BACK IN TOWN, beach bums and bikers in THE SWEET RIDE (1968), prostitution and Satanism in THE PYX (1973), and drug dealing in THE HIGH COUNTRY (1981). FORTUNE AND MEN'S EYES, Mr Hart's fourth motion picture released in 1971 was no different, again focusing upon a difficult subject.

FORTUNE AND MEN'S EYES explores a number of characters in a jail, explicating their experiences of life behind bars for the viewer.  Men in jail is a subject which Mr Hart treats bravely and with honesty, as witnessed by his focus upon the central quartet of characters, showing them from all angles. While it could be said that some of his protagonists slightly resemble stereotypes, the acting which he elicits from his cast takes away from this assumption. While FORTUNE AND MEN'S EYES was adapted from a stage play of the same name the film is not stagy in any way, the director deftly moving the action from the cell which the four main characters inhabit, to other locations in the jail.

The director has included many revealing and eye-opening scenes of prison life such as male rape, violence and death which thankfully do not last too long on screen, but whose realism is still pungent. While these are important parts of the film, the scenes of attempted humour such as the episodes where prisoners tip buckets on water from above on other prisoners dent the emotional punch of some of its most intense stretches. These forays into dark comedy do not assist the film, only denting its impact, and could have been easily excluded. Despite these faults, this is a stark, uncompromising film which at times can be painful to watch. In the final analysis, FORTUNE AND MEN'S EYES should be lauded for attempting to intimately examine a social issue in all its grittiness.

Acting: The acting in this film is largely above-average, with several striking performances. Wendell Burton as Smitty, the film's main character does well with the material, making his transformation from victim to victimizer believable, despite some lapses in the film's continuity. He has a way about himself that indicates the character's fright at being jailed, and his general discomfort at being thrown into jail evident to the viewer. Mr Burton also looked like someone who would possibly find themselves in a difficult predicament, his clean-cut good looks initially typing him as the pure innocent, which is eventually shattered as the film progresses. Danny Freedman, as the hen-pecked, sensitive Mona, also delivers a believable performance, and his final few scenes with Wendell Burton are extremely moving, and exhibit tremendous chemistry between the actors. Mr Freedman is also highly proficient in earning audience sympathy as the helpless rape victim, his whimpering haunting as he is set upon by the other prisoners. There is, though, one performance which stands out in particular in FORTUNE AND MEN'S EYES for its sheer excellence.

The film's best performance is by David Zooey Hall as the charismatic, sexually ambivalent Rocky, Smitty, Mona, and Queenie's jail roommate. From his first scenes in FORTUNE AND MEN'S EYES, Mr Hall projected an assurance, a quiet sensuality, teamed with a danger that made him someone you could not move your eyes away from whenever he was on screen. Mr Hall was reminiscent of method actors such as Marlon Brando who have attended the Actors Studio, so poised was his performance, despite playing a character who could be alternately protective, and nefarious. On the other hand, Michael Greer as Queenie delivered a good performance, especially in the final few scenes, but his character was abrasive, and annoying at times, with a shrill voice that sometimes took away from the film's thoughtful and somber tone. The last segments redeemed him somewhat, showing that the character was indeed manipulative, and more than just a walking drag show.

Soundtrack: The use of the theme song in FORTUNE AND MEN'S EYES composed by Galt MacDermot at both the film's introduction, and at its conclusion provides a bittersweet commentary on the action which is to take place. Apart from this, there is minimal use of music, except for several instances such as the water fight in the eating hall which add a pseudo-comical feel to the action. This is par for the course for many 1970s films, which preferred a lack of music score or musical accompaniment to the onscreen action to allow what is happening to take precedence for the audience.

Mise-en-scene: FORTUNE AND MEN'S EYES was filmed in an actual jail, and this assists it tremendously in creating an authentic atmosphere for the viewer. One aspect that was striking about the film was that it was well lit, something which one would expect to be the opposite in terms of a dreary, depressing ambiance. This works in the film's favour as it allows the viewer to see the character's faces clearly, and their reactions to what is taking place, without mood lighting to create an artificial atmosphere. The beginning of the film is also noteworthy, with the bitterly cold winter in which Smitty and the other prisoners are transported into jail a metaphor for his chilling experience later in detention.

Award-worthy performances in my opinion: David Zooey Hall, Wendell Burton, Danny Freedman.

Suitability for young viewers: No. Male nudity, frequent coarse language, adult themes, medium-level violence, sexual violence.

Overall Grade: C

Link: IMDB Page

Trailer



Wednesday, January 1, 2020

IN SEARCH OF GREGORY (1969)


Title: IN SEARCH OF GREGORY

Year of Release: 1969

Director: Peter Wood

Genre: Drama, Mystery

Synopsis: A young woman coming home for her father's wedding becomes enchanted with the image of a racing car driver on a poster, thinking it is her brother's friend Gregory, and sets out to find this mysterious and enigmatic young man.

Within a film history context: Like brother-brother relationships, films which highlight brother-sister unions have been featured many times in cinema history. A comical example is ROYAL WEDDING (1952) in which a brother and his younger sister find romance in London. Other examples from the 1950s include WRITTEN ON THE WIND (1956), featuring a dramatic brother-sister union, while MON ONCLE (1958) was a more humorous take on this, with a man coming to grips with his sister's state of the art home, which initiates most of the action in the movie. The 1960s brought BUNNY LAKE IS MISSING (1965), a tense, suspenseful take on brother-sister relationships, which was psychologically more complex than the previous examples. More notable films with brother-sister characters were produced in the 1970s.

Movies such as THE LANDLORD (1970) has a sympathetic but wacky sister, and a warm sibling connection between the characters. THE POSSESSION OF JOEL DELANEY (1972) was in stark contrast to this, in the vein of BUNNY LAKE IS MISSING, but much more violent in nature. It again possessed the difficult brother-sister dynamic, but with a more tragic tinge. Arriving at decade's end SUMMER'S CHILDREN (1979) was by far the most in-depth exploration of a brother and sister bond, highlighting their loving, fragile, but slightly incestuous relationship. IN SEARCH OF GREGORY could be said to share a very slight connection to SUMMER'S CHILDREN with regards to the incest angle, and its minor love triangle element.

In comparison to SUMMER'S CHILDREN, IN SEARCH OF GREGORY is much lighter, and significantly more humorous in tone. Where IN SEARCH OF GREGORY differs from other films is in the unconventional love triangle between a brother, his sister, and another man. The man is someone the sister thinks is the titular Gregory she sees from a poster of a racing car driver, while the brother actually does know Gregory, and mentions him endlessly, as does everyone else in the film. This amusing situation produces the majority of the action in the film, and the puzzle/mistaken identity angle sets it apart from other brother-sister films produced.

Overview: IN SEARCH OF GREGORY holds the distinction of being director Peter Wood's only film, his career largely spent directing television series episodes, with various producing and other television credits, and two telemovies. Mr Wood has directed a film that moves at a leisurely pace, a casual mystery which spreads the question about exactly who Gregory is throughout the entire film, but, it never becomes tiresome. The narrative could be said to dart back and forth with this storyline but it is handled in such a breezy, entertaining manner, with red herrings placed at strategic moments that do not frustrate but only tantalise, and delight.

With IN SEARCH OF GREGORY, Mr Wood has successfully captured a portrait of a brother and sister both enthused with someone who may be a figment of their imagination, but, again may not be, and finding out the truth about this situation is what makes this film a pleasure to watch. The film has a genial feel to it, with characters who while wealthy are not arch or snobby, but easy-going, and understanding. Mr Wood has painted an appealing portrait of an upper class family, and of a gentle world given to dreamy interludes, fantasy, and leisure. This may have been the reason why the film did not succeed at the box office during a time of changing tastes in cinema, audiences wanting stronger fare than what this film offered. On the other hand, the serene atmosphere that IN SEARCH OF GREGORY possesses, its sense of relaxed chic and style make it a thoroughly enjoyable experience for audiences seeking a diversion from more heavy-duty content.

Acting: While all the acting in the film is very good in keeping with the movie's ethereal mood, two performances in particular stand out for their excellence. Julie Christie's personality propels the film, making what may seem strange, or otherworldly at first glance into something special. Miss Christie has a penchant for portraying spirited heroines on a particular quest, and is no different in this movie. Her natural, unforced persona works to great effect in the movie, making the viewer interested in what she is seeking without pomp or histrionics. Miss Christie is matched well with John Hurt, who plays her brother Daniel.

Where Julie Christie's Catherine could be classified as normal with a dreamy outlook, John Hurt's Daniel is more along the lines of a zany rich young man with no particular mission, just to enjoy life. Mr Hurt's wacky man-child, along with Miss Christie's luminous portrait of a young woman in love, elevate the film far beyond what it may have seemed on paper. Apart from Julie Christie and John Hurt, special mention must also be made of Michael Sarrazin, who has a largely non-speaking part in the movie. Uttering a minimum of dialogue until his final scenes, Mr Sarrazin brought a sensuality, intrigue, and allure to IN SEARCH OF GREGORY, making Miss Christie's obsession with him comprehensible.

Soundtrack: Like other films of its era, IN SEARCH OF GREGORY does not have a score which is played throughout the film. Apart from some incidental music in some scenes, the only piece that is used to greatest effect is 'Dreams' performed by singer Georgie Fame. As with BUSTER AND BILLIE, this song is played at both the beginning, and at the film's end. Similarly to BUSTER AND BILLIE, the significance of the song is sketchy at first, but makes sound sense at the film's conclusion, perfectly embodying what the film wishes to achieve in its restrained, but emotionally satisfying manner.

Mise-en-scene: IN SEARCH OF GREGORY has sets and locations which have stood the test of time fifty years after its initial release. While some films from this era had sets which were 'mod' in style, and have dated considerably over the years, in this film they are solid, and still easy on the eyes. From the luxurious Morelli family home, the elegant boat on which Mr Morelli's wedding takes place, to the streets of Geneva and other set pieces, to name just a few examples, IN SEARCH OF GREGORY's sets and locations are down to earth for films of this era. They present a natural backdrop to the action instead of calling undue attention to themselves or detracting from the actors. Apart from sets and locations, other aspects of the film are of interest.

The costuming is also another beguiling feature of the movie that complements the visual experience for the viewer. The outfits which Miss Christie wears are indicative of the era, with some mini-skirts and apparel which still seem acceptable today, due to the block colours of the garments in question. Mr Hurt's wardrobe is also similar, and the white dress shirts with frills may seem silly, but they highlight his way out character without being too off-kilter. The clothing worn by Michael Sarrazin is also low-key but elegant, making the sometimes lanky actor look smart. One stylistic component of the film which is slightly disappointing is how Miss Christie's face, in some scenes, appears shadowy, this making her seem dank. Possibly this was to show the character in revealing emotional moments with her brother, but, for this viewer it did not flatter Miss Christie's features in the least.

Award-worthy performances in my opinion: Julie Christie, John Hurt, Michael Sarrazin.

Suitability for young viewers: Parental discretion advised. Brief male nudity, adult themes.

Overall Grade: B

Link: IMDB Page

Movie Excerpt