INTERVIEW WITH SCREENWRITER DAVID SALE

I have the great pleasure today of welcoming a very special guest, screenwriter David Sale, to CINEMATIC REVELATIONS for an interview. David was the writer of both the big-screen version of NUMBER 96 [my review of the film can be found here] and the series, and creator of the serial. He also has credits in Australian television, particularly as writer and executive producer of The Mavis Bramston Show. In this interview David will be discussing his role as writer in the NUMBER 96 movie, screenwriting, and acting, and moviemaking.

Welcome to CINEMATIC REVELATIONS David!

Athan: Where did you learn the art of screenwriting?

David: My only lessons were from watching movies. I was a film fan from childhood. I believe that the ability to write is an in-born talent. Even in primary school, my little essays were read out to the class by our teacher. I loved thinking up stories then writing them down. Teaching courses can channel the ability to write into special fields such as books or screenwriting, but the basic talent has to be there. I had no training at all.

*

Athan: Where did you study acting?

David: Again, I had no formal training. My parents and I were migrants from Manchester. I wanted to be a journalist, so started a cadetship with the ABC News Dept. in Melbourne.  However, I drifted into acting with a suburban amateur group, then I graduated to the Melbourne Little Theatre where I part-wrote and performed in two hit revues. I decided to go back to England to become a professional actor where nobody could laugh at me if I failed. Almost immediately I did a summer season of weekly Rep in Bognor Regis, then played the murderer in Agatha Christie’s The Mousetrap in a British Council tour to Malta. Back in London, I played Malcolm in Macbeth, various bits on TV and two “B” grade movies. I was up for a part in Coronation Street thanks to my dormant Lancashire accent, but that meant going back to live in Manchester where it was filmed and that seemed like a backward step. Homesickness for Australia won out and I came back to Melbourne, resuming and combining  the writing for TV (In Melbourne Tonight etc.) with acting - more revues, a Melbourne Theatre Company tour of And the Big Men Fly, and a year understudying the King in a lavish production of The King and I. (I never got to go on, thankfully - I was under rehearsed and too young for the part). I was content playing his “secretary, Phra Alack. Then I switched to Sydney, just in time for The Mavis Bramston Show, and my career REALLY took off!!!

*

Athan: NUMBER 96 was the top-rating show of the early 1970s in Australian television. How did the concept for a film version eventuate?

David: It seemed a logical step. The TV series was still in black and white. Film offered the opportunity of colour - and to producers Cash-Harmon the chance to make even more money by capitalising on the TV series’ phenomenal success.

*

Athan: I found the intertwined stories of drama, and comedy entertaining in the NUMBER 96 movie. How did you select the stories which made their way to the screen? Were there stories proposed for the movie that could not be presented for reasons such as time constraints?

David: Script Editor Johnny Whyte and I collaborated on the screenplay. Over a week-end, we thought up individual; and entertaining plots that suited the characters and could all be resolved in two hours instead of being strung out over numerous episodes. Johnny and I then just took blocks of storyline to script and these dovetailed perfectly into the whole because we knew each other’s work - and our subjects - so well.

*

Athan: What did you most enjoy about the experience of filming the NUMBER 96 movie?

David: I had little to do with the actual filming once our screenplay was handed over. The actual filming was a breeze for everyone involved. It was completed in two weeks by actors familiar with their parts, on the existing studio sets,  A few outdoor scenes were included, it rained on two of the exterior filming days, but the film still came in on time and - reportedly - under budget.

*

Athan: What were the main differences for you in the NUMBER 96 movie as compared to the television series?

David: There seemed little difference to me. I was writing for characters I’d created and knew off-by-heart. Except for when it hit the big screen of course, I was able to experience the incredible reaction of the live audiences first-hand, attending the various premieres. Not only were they seeing their favourite characters in colour, but as each character made his or her first appearance, there was a deafening wave of applause as if it were a stage show. I found that quite moving.

*

Athan: What for you was the most demanding, but emotionally satisfying segment of writing the NUMBER 96 movie?

David: I don’t want to diminish the task of doing the movie, but really it was just like writing an extension of the series. The veteran Hollywood screenwriter, Casey Robinson, had come to live in Australia and became a friend. He’d been prolific at Warner Bros during Hollywood’s Golden Years and wrote many of the Bette Davis hits such as Now Voyager and Dark Victory. He was sitting nearby at the Sydney premiere, and I wondered apprehensively what he would think of our humble offering.  He said: “Good work - you’re giving the people exactly what they want!”

*

Athan: Have you kept in contact with any cast members and crew from NUMBER 96?

David: Sadly, many of the participants of Number 96 have passed on, but we survivors are like family. I’m still regularly in contact with Sheila Kennelly, Carol Raye, Lynnie Rainbow and others.

*

Athan: NUMBER 96 was directed by Peter Benardos, who also directed the series version of Number 96, and was his only feature film. What was your experience working with Mr Benardos on the movie?

David: As I said, I had little to do with the actual filming, but Peter Benardos was the utter professional who had worked efficiently on countless episodes of the series as director, so I knew the movie was in safe hands.

*

Athan: NUMBER 96 the movie was one of the top-grossing Australian films at the box office in 1974. How did it feel seeing the characters, and stories you created on the big screen?

David: Top grossing. Thereby hangs a murky tale! Our contracts stipulated that Johnny Whyte and I split the $10,000 for the screenplay into $5,000 each, but also that we were to receive a small percentage (I forget how much) of “the producer’s gross profit.” Thanks to some fancy manipulation in the world of accountancy, Johnny and I never received another cent! We were either so naïve or carried away by success, we let it pass.

*

Athan: You had a bit part in the 1959 American movie ON THE BEACH, which was made in Australia by United Artists, and directed by Stanley Kramer. The film starred American screen actors Gregory Peck and Ava Gardner in major parts. What was it like making the movie, and meeting these luminaries?

David: I was still a cadet reporter on ABC radio News when I “took a sickie” to answer a casting call for a day’s ‘extra’ work in On the Beach. Every actor in Melbourne had put their name down, but ended up in street crowd scenes. I was fortunate enough - I know not why - to be called as a guest on a confined set - a great opportunity to see the four major stars work. It was actually Fred Astaire’s big scene, and he was a little withdrawn and worried about remembering his lines, but managed to lighten things up by doing a few incongruous tap steps. Watching off-camera, a hand clapped on my shoulder.  I looked up and Gregory Peck smiled down at me.  “I gather we’re all doomed”, he joked.   Little did I know that in later years I’d be great friends with his ex-wife, Greta. Ava Gardner was also friendly. During a break, she flopped down in the chair next to me on the ‘veranda’ of the fake house the party was in. She was complaining to her hairdresser that she never got letters from friends at. home.  Her hairdresser said: “But Ava, in order to GET letters, you also have to SEND them.”   Ava turned to me. “I can’t write - I can’t even spell.”  “Why don’t you use a dictionary?”  I suggested. She patted my knee. “The words I wanna use aren’t IN a dictionary!” she replied with a naughty wink. It was a magical day for me.

*

Athan: You also acted in two British films from 1960, JUST JOE and CROSSROADS TO CRIME. How did you feel in the capacity of actor in these movies?

David: I felt comfortable immediately and quickly learned the trick of blotting out the looming camera and about a dozen crew members crowding intently it  seemed like just inches away…and instead I just concentrated on the person I was swapping dialogue with. In Just Joe the other person was Jon Pertwee, who was later to become one of the “Doctor No’s” or “Who’s” or whatever he was called.   He was very kind and put me at ease in the six scenes we shared together. I played his assistant in a soap factory. And I was able to repay his kindness in a final scene when he had to stay completely submerged in a vat of soapy water until I had delivered the tongue-twisting line: “It’s the black speckles in “SQUIZZ” that make every day a white washday!” I did it in one take, for which Jon was truly grateful.

My bit (blink and you’ll miss me) in Crossroads to Crime led to a lifelong friendship with the wonderful Miriam Karlin. During a break, she motioned me over to where she was sitting and asked for my name and phone number. She thought I was just the type when replacements became necessary in the hit show she was starring in - Fings Ain't What They Used to Be. Nothing came of this kind gesture, but when she came to Australia she remembered me and when she heard of my writing she insisted on my doing all her special material in The Mavis Bramston Show.

*

Athan: Do you have any upcoming projects of which you would like to tell readers?

David: I came to live in Queensland [Australia] to take it easy. but a writer never retires. There are always intriguing ideas and potential plots buzzing around in a writer's mind, so one never knows….

*

Thank you so much today for your time David, and for the understanding you have provided into the art of screenwriting, acting, the NUMBER 96 movie, and moviemaking. It has been wonderful to have you on CINEMATIC REVELATIONS. You are welcome to return whenever you wish.

*

David Sale links

+David Sale IMDb Page

+NUMBER 96 movie IMDb page

INTERVIEW WITH ACTRESS MANUELA THIESS GARCIA

Today I have the immense pleasure of welcoming a very special guest, actress Manuela Thiess Garcia, to CINEMATIC REVELATIONS for an interview. Manuela has acted in several motion pictures over the years including BUCKSKIN, CHANGES [my review of the film can be found here] and TERROR CIRCUS. In this interview Manuela will be discussing her part in CHANGES, acting, theatre, and her passion for photography, poetry, and writing.

Welcome to CINEMATIC REVELATIONS Manuela!

Athan: When did you first realize that you wanted to be an actress?

Manuela: I started studying acting at around age 22.  I had actually had a bit of an aversion to acting before that as I did not want to enter my parents’ profession.  But perhaps because I moved to Laurel Canyon, Hollywood rubbed off on me in spite of myself. 

*

Athan: Where did you study acting?

Manuela: I studied method acting with Estelle Harman for several years and Guy Stockwell after that before joining Ralph Waite’s L.A. Actor’s Theatre.

*

Athan: What did you find most exciting about the experience of making CHANGES?

Manuela:  Truthfully, I had a mad crush on Kent [Lane], and that certainly made working on the picture titillating.  In addition, it was my first film and that made every moment a new and exhilarating experience.   

A day that was more than a little exiting was when I had to walk into the ocean to drown myself.  I had nearly drowned in the ocean as a teenager and I was terrified of the waves.  That was a helicopter shot and so there was nobody down there on that rocky beach but myself.  Plus it was freezing in Big Sur (I think it was February), and I had to do the scene several times in clothes that were soaking wet.  I was glad when that day was over.

*

Athan: Your performance as the loving, sensitive Bobbi in CHANGES, who makes a decision which irrevocably changes her life, was excellent. For you, what was the most demanding, but emotionally satisfying segment of filming CHANGES?

Manuela:  When I had to cry.  I hadn’t cried in my personal life in years.  To conjure those tears took some doing, especially in front of the whole crew, but it felt really good to have been able to do that.

*

Athan: Have you kept in contact with any cast members and crew from CHANGES?

Manuela: No, I have not, though I have occasionally tried to google one or two of them to see what they were up to.

*

Athan: CHANGES was directed by Hall Bartlett, also notable for films such as ALL THE YOUNG MEN, THE SANDPIT GENERALS, and JONATHAN LIVINGSTON SEAGULL. What was it like being directed by Mr Bartlett in CHANGES?

Manuela:  At the time, I was young, self-obsessed and foolish and had no idea what a truly extraordinary man I was working for. Hall struck me as an all round decent human being and he was kind to me, as he was to everyone, but I had little appreciation for the talent he had and what a true artist he was and continued to be.  Nor had I been aware that he had graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Harvard, which I only found out when I read about him in the Wikipedia.

*

Athan: You have worked on the stage in various productions years ago, also writing several plays. What for you most stood out when comparing the theatre, and film?

Manuela:  My mother started out to be a stage actress, and she had had a love for that, which I think prompted me to want to try it.  It’s really impossible to compare the two mediums.  Stage acting requires perhaps more agility, for if you forget a line, or someone else does, you have to be quick on your toes and work around that.  But there is also a lot of repetition of the same script over and over, even given the small variations night to night.  In film acting, you have to let your emotions show in a way that stage does not demand, and although you sometimes have to do retakes, the action moves much faster. And for closeups, there is no cheating allowed.

*

Athan: You have been a photographer for many years, your photos capturing both the beauty, and different facets of cities such as Barcelona, Spain, Cologne, Germany, and Paris, France, to name a few examples. What is it that you find most exciting about photography?

Manuela:  I wrote a poem about that, I think I posted it on my website.  In photography, you can capture a split second in time.  I often feel like a thief, though I rarely know what I actually stole until I get home and have a chance to review what I shot on the computer as I shoot digitally.  That keeps it adventurous and exciting for me.  

I find by studying the faces of strangers (for I shoot random people on the streets more often than not), I get more understanding and compassion for our misbegotten species with all its flaws and imperfections.  

As for scenery, the sky and the circumstances constantly change, so like with expressions, capturing of a moment in time that will never repeat.

*

Athan: Your website features poetry and writing pieces by you, dealing with a number of themes, especially your thoughts on life. How does poetry, and writing make you feel?

Manuela:  Writing, whether in journals, small essays, one act plays or poetry, has been a great emotional salve for life wounds I would otherwise not have had a chance to allow to heal.  I highly recommend it as a therapeutic tool for anyone working through emotional distress.  It has a way of putting confusion into a more rational perspective.  Also, by sharing those experiences with others, there is a kind of cleansing, and a way of ingraining into my subconscious what I have learned and continue to learn each day, for the journey doesn't stop until we stop breathing, once and for all. What happens after that remains a tantalizing mystery, does it not?

*

Athan: You have also taught in the California Department of Corrections, and as a Suicide Prevention Counselor. What it is that you found most enriching with these challenging, but rewarding positions?

Manuela:  At the Suicide Prevention Center I only worked as a volunteer counselor for around 8 months, and I had to quit when I started to get too many nightmares, specifically about callers which worried me when they hung up, which they did once in a while. But it helped me get insight into my own suicidal impulses as well as later when I worked in the CDC to be able to recognize those potential impulses in my students.

I worked for the California Department of Corrections for 15 years, and I loved that job.  I have never been good with bureaucracies and I riled against the administrative aspect of of the job, but I was fond of my students (for the most part) and of my fellow teachers. It was kind of like being stranded on an island together once those bars clinked shut.  

I learned a great deal about crime and punishment and the counter productivity of the American penal system.  The experience has given me an appreciation for the Restorative Justice model of corrections.  The U.S. had more people incarcerated per capita than any place in the world.  Think of that.  The land of the free and the home of the brave?

*

Athan: Do you have any upcoming projects of which you would like to tell readers?

Manuela:  I have another local exhibit coming up and my husband and I just opened a gallery here in Guanajuato featuring my photography but other local artists as well. In addition, I am working to finally gather all my poems and put them in a book. I will keep my website updated.  If you are ever in Guanajuato, come and share a coffee with us at our gallery.  And thank you, Athan for taking an interest in my work and asking me to participate in this interview.

*

Thank you so much for your time today Manuela, and for the insight you have provided into the art of acting, CHANGES, cinema, theatre, photography, poetry and writing. It has been wonderful having you on CINEMATIC REVELATIONS. You are welcome to return whenever you wish.

*

Manuela Thiess Garcia links

+Manuela Thiess Garcia IMDb Actress Page

+CHANGES movie IMDb page

+Manuela Thiess Garcia Official Website

+Manuela Thiess Garcia Instagram page

+Manuela Thiess Garcia Facebook page

*

Manuela Thiess Garcia clip from Death Valley Days

CHANGES (1969)

Title: CHANGES

Year of Release: 1969

Director: Hall Bartlett

Genre: Drama, Romance, Counterculture

Synopsis: A young man seeks to find himself, taking to the road, and having a number of experiences, and relationships, along the way.

Within a film history context: During the late 1960s and early 1970s, there were numerous films which were concerned with anti-establishment counterculture characters and scenarios. One of the first was Roger Corman's THE TRIP (1967). After suffering a traumatic divorce from his wife, a television director falls into drugs, and has many way out experiences. Notable for its cast, including Peter Fonda, Dennis Hopper, and Bruce Dern, it was an interesting foray into counterculture themes. THE NUDE RESTAURANT (1967), directed by Andy Warhol, was a confrontational story of a restaurant, its waiters, waitresses and patrons, discussing a little of everything in this underground movie. More entertaining was Eliot Silverstein's THE HAPPENING (1967). Four young people kidnap a wealthy man, and hold him to ransom, but events conspire against their original plans. As with many counterculture movies, it has a splendid cast, in this case Anthony Quinn in the lead role, with support from George Maharis, Michael Parks, and Faye Dunaway in an early part. Different in tone was GREETINGS (1968), directed by Brian de Palma. It was an unconventional tale of three men getting up to many adventures in late 1960s New York City, with references to issues fresh at the time such as Vietnam, how to avoid the draft, and computer dating, to name a few. It led to a sequel in 1970, being HI, MOM!, which was equally irreverent, both films starring Robert De Niro. 

Another raucous picture was Barry Shear's WILD IN THE STREETS (1968). A young rock singer becomes president of the United States, which leads to much mayhem, but many colorful, original set pieces. SKIDOO (1968), directed by Otto Preminger, was an all-star comedy about the life of a former hit man, and the many outrageous situations in which he, and his family, participate. Alternately dealing with topics such as the counterculture, hippies, free love, and LSD, it was a departure for its director, but not a financial success in its original release. Bob Rafelson's HEAD (1968) was akin in some respects, but in a much more innocent vein. The film charted the exploits of pop group The Monkees, with many musical interludes, and adventures thrown in. On the other hand, PSYCH-OUT (1968), directed by Richard Rush, concerned a deaf young woman looking for her brother in San Francisco, and how through this search she encountered wild characters, with the effects of drugs deftly portrayed in the narrative. Outlandish could be said to describe Hy Averback's I LOVE YOU, ALICE B. TOKLAS (1968). Through a series of events, a straitlaced attorney meets a flower power young woman, and becomes part of the hippie lifestyle, this experience changing his views on love, and life. CHANGES distinguished itself from the other movies with its lusher, more romantic, clean-cut orientation, but still shared some elements from the previous counterculture movies.

The movie very lightly touched upon the counterculture movement with its main character, university student Kent, railing against authority, and what he perceived were his parents', and the generation of his parents', preoccupation with the straight and narrow, money and status. This was seen to be to the detriment of freedom, spontaneity, and happiness. This in-depth narrative treatment was a contrast to the more frivolous, shallow views of counterculture ideals espoused by examples such as GREETINGS, WILD IN THE STREETS, and I LOVE YOU, ALICE B. TOKLAS. The characters in these movies, in some cases, were two-dimensional, in comparison to the full-blooded characterization of Kent, and his emotional battles. It was not rebellion just for its own sake in CHANGES. The rebellion was a culmination of feelings, perceptions of the world, and personal experiences which make Kent want to abandon the safety of his world, and experience unfamiliar things in life. Other facets of the movie are also worth discussing for how they are unlike those of other counterculture movies.

While many of the films in the genre utilized drugs, and drug-taking, in a somewhat flashy and exploitative manner, to appear fashionable or trendy, such as THE TRIP, WILD IN THE STREETS, and I LOVE YOU, ALICE B. TOKLAS, in CHANGES they receive fleeting attention. It appears that Kent did experiment with drugs at one stage, which he admits to his shocked mother, but drugs are not given the exhaustive treatment the other movies provided. In CHANGES, drugs were something Kent tried but did not continue, and, aside from one scene in the movie depicting the use of these, that is where the references to narcotics end. It is more about a phase that came and went for the protagonist, instead of drugs being the focal point in the movie. In addition, other counterculture themes and motifs receive a different airing in CHANGES. While there are some views of student protests in the movie, and the final credits include images of what was taking place in the world in the late 1960s, CHANGES does not go overboard in this respect. It was mainly about Kent's journey, and what he gleaned from these experiences, rather than a wholesale examination of counterculture values rising to the fore. A novel take on counterculture movies, CHANGES is a great film.

Overview: Hall Bartlett directed nine feature films over a period of twenty-three years, with some action movies, and more thoughtful fare interspersed. Mr Bartlett made his debut with UNCHAINED (1955) which was about a prisoner who wants to go home after serving out his sentence, but is enticed to escape from jail. Next came DRANGO (1957) which was a western set during the American Civil War, and the effect a Union officer's presence has on a small Georgia town. In ZERO HOUR! (1957) various incidents occur in an airplane such as the food poisoning of passengers, which also affects the flying crew, and how a man is forced to take over the operation of the craft. ALL THE YOUNG MEN (1960) dealt with the Korean War, and how a black sergeant takes over a squad of both white, and black soldiers, which brings about much racism and dissent. In total contrast, THE CARETAKERS (1963) charted events in a mental health facility, particularly affecting the patients, and personnel such as psychiatrists, and also, the chief of staff. THE SANDPIT GENERALS (1971), set in Brazil, was the examination of disadvantaged young people, and the dangerous, illicit activities in which they indulge. One of Mr Bartlett's most famous films was JONATHAN LIVINGSTON SEAGULL (1973), and his penultimate movie. It was the inspirational story of a young seagull whose exploits make him unpopular with his own flock, but eventually finding his way in life. Mr Bartlett's final motion picture, THE CHILDREN OF SANCHEZ (1978) was the character study of a man in Mexico City, detailing his family life, especially his strained relationship with his daughter, who wants to move away from him, and his arduous life. CHANGES was Hall Bartlett's sixth film, and one of his best efforts, sharing the perceptive thread that marked all his output.

Hall Bartlett has made a ruminative movie, essentially a character study, about a young man in the late 1960s who is seeking to find out who he is, his thoughts about the world, what he wants from it, and discover his place in the universe. CHANGES is a carefully-made narrative which is sensitive to not only its lead protagonist but also, the supporting characters who come into contact with him. The viewer finds out exactly why everyone acts, says, and does what they do, which gives the movie a sense of clarity and comfort. It unfolds in a naturalistic manner, without overt melodrama, but with many emotional, and truthful moments. While the film has a leaning toward the soft, and romantic in its storytelling, this is refreshing in an era when 'everything hung out' in cinema, to use the term. The amorous scenes, and interludes in CHANGES are not empty or schmaltzy, but always backed up by the feelings of its characters, and where they in that particular time. There are no exploitative bed scenes or nudity, which gives CHANGES a feeling of lightness, away from overt permissiveness. The movie could also be seen as a male wish fulfillment story, in that it charts Kent's relationships with three very different women, but the film's grounding in emotions, rather than painting Kent as a Lothario, works. While CHANGES has many virtues, there are some features which reduce what could have been an excellent motion picture, into one which is very good.

The story of Julie and Kent's love affair is the one story which is fully fleshed out, and most satisfying in terms of its execution. In comparison, Kent and Bobbi's relationship, while beautifully portrayed, would have benefitted from extending. One understands why Bobbi takes the decision she makes, but it would have been even better to have seen more of her, and her union with Kent. There was more that could have been showcased in terms of Bobbi's mental state, and slow descent into depression. In addition, Kent's short spell with Kristine was too abbreviated; as with his time with Bobbi, but it may have acted as a bridging device to the next relationship, and learning experience, with Julie. There is the implication that three sides of Kent were explored in CHANGES; with Bobbi he was selfish, with Kristine becoming more rounded as a person, but with Julie, he was considering her more for a long-term union, but was still uncertain of himself. While this may have been the intention of the film, it still leaves Kent and Kristine's story slightly undeveloped. Despite these flaws, one thing is for certain about CHANGES. It is a sincere film that deserves a higher reputation than it has had over the past fifty years, especially with reference to its director, cast and crew.

Acting: The performances in CHANGES make the movie a convincing experience. In the lead role of Kent, Kent Lane is completely believable as the confused young man who wants to find out more about himself, but keeps running into roadblocks. As Bobbi, the first of the young women involved with Kent, Manuela Thiess Garcia vividly creates a loving young woman seeking love from Kent, but finding herself unable to accept his rejection. The most affecting of the acting portraits in the movie, Miss Thiess Garcia's interpretation of the sensitive Bobbi is a standout. The enterprising reporter Kristine is played with ease and charm by Marcia Strassman. While her relationship with Kent is all too short on screen, Miss Strassman does a great job as the clever Kristine. The final acting of note in CHANGES was by Michele Carey as Julie, Kent's last flame in the movie. Her Julie was full of passion, flightiness, humor and fun, and Miss Carey perfectly captured the restless nature of her multi-faceted character.

Soundtrack: CHANGES features a number of introspective late 1960s tunes on its soundtrack. One of the most notable is Tim Buckley's 'She Is', which is played during the scenes with Kent and Bobbi on the beach. The other tunes are all suitable to what is occurring onscreen without ever being a obtrusive, or blaring.

Mise-en-scene: CHANGES has great attention to detail with what is presented in front of the camera. Cinematography by Richard Moore takes advantage of beautiful California locations, with picture-perfect beaches, mountains, and other landscapes stunningly captured. Costuming is another highlight, with elegant garments worn by actresses courtesy of Angela Alexander, and actors dressed by Wesley Jeffries. The wardrobe department has selected apparel which still appears graceful and stylish after more than a half-century, which is in stark contrast to many films of the period with clothing which seems dated, and of their era. 

There is, though, one section of the movie which is discordant in retrospect. The closing credits are one aspect which does not mesh with the film overall. While it sums up the mood of the epoch in terms of events and subjects, it would have been more appropriate instead having Kent walking on the beach, thinking about his life. It feels slightly forced, as the movie itself included references to what was taking place at that time in the world, and displaying it in this manner is unnecessary.

Notable Acting Performances: Kent Lane, Manuela Thiess Garcia, Marcia Strassman, Michele Carey.

Suitability for young viewers: Parental discretion advised. Adult themes.

Overall Grade: B

Link: IMDB Page

LOLLY-MADONNA XXX (1973)

Title: LOLLY-MADONNA XXX (Alternate titles: THE LOLLY-MADONNA WAR, FIRE IN THE MEADOW)

Year of Release: 1973

Director: Richard C. Sarafian

Genre: Drama

Synopsis: A long-standing feud between two farming families, the Gutshalls and the Feathers, reaches a tragic head in rural Tennessee.

Within a film history context: Movies about family feuds have been featured on various occasions in cinema history. One of the first was Charles Brabin's THE ADOPTED SON (1917). Concentrating upon the feud between two Tennessee families, along with the romance and drama there were some unexpected surprises. Another documented film dealing with family feuds was ACROSS THE DEADLINE (1922), directed by Jack Conway. In this movie, two brothers are divided along moral lines, and their differences cause untold problems for their families. John G. Blystone and Buster Keaton's OUR HOSPITALITY (1923) was less serious in its execution, being a comedy. Set in the 1830s, a long-running family feud between two clans is reactivated when a man from one side falls for a young woman from the other family, not knowing her identity. A famous film of its time, and a box office success, it was a triumph for actor-director Buster Keaton. A possibly lost silent film, ACE OF ACTION (1926), directed by William Bertram, was about a feud between two families over a waterhole, and how an outsider becomes involved in this dispute, particularly with reference to his romance with a young female family member. Movies about family feuds continued into the sound era from the silent screen.

Alfred Hitchcock's THE SKIN GAME (1931) revolved around the feud between two families, one old money, the other new money, and how conflict over property bring these people nothing but unhappiness and dissension. Young love, and family feuds were the raison d'etre of THE GUILTY GENERATION (1931), directed by Rowland V. Lee. A feud between two Italian-American mobsters reaches a head when their offspring fall in love. Vengeance again played a role in Henry Hathaway's TO THE LAST MAN (1933). Two Kentucky families fight over a murder, and budding love between two members of the warring clans. A more humorous take on family feuds was served by IN OLD KENTUCKY (1935), directed by George Marshall. As with TO THE LAST MAN, the film featured two battling Kentucky families, but differed in that the feud was to be settled by a horse race between both clans. It was mainly notable as the final film of Will Rogers, and released after his death. Much more intense was George Cukor's ROMEO AND JULIET (1936). The oft-told story of two warring aristocratic families, and a romance between two members of these clans, featured Leslie Howard, and Norma Shearer, in the titular roles of the tragic lovers. Into the 1940s, more films employed the feuding family theme in various ways.

Programmer BEYOND THE PECOS (1945), directed by Lambert Hillyer, followed two clans coming to loggerheads over the discovery of oil on ranch land, coupled with two male members of each family seeking the love of a woman. Brian Desmond Hurst's HUNGRY HILL (1947) was of a similar persuasion, this time set in Ireland, with two Irish families battling over a copper mine. In contrast, THE GAL WHO TOOK THE WEST (1949), directed by Frederick De Cordova, set in the Wild West, concerned itself with a feud between two cousins from one family over a woman. This alternated from the many movies on the topic where conflict occurred between members of different families. On the other hand, Irving Reis and Nicholas Ray's ROSEANNA MCCOY (1949) dealt with the infamous Hatfield-McCoy feud, particularly focusing upon the romance of the eponymous character with Johnse Hatfield, which caused further discord between the families. The 1950s and beyond also had several notable movies about family feuds.

VENGEANCE ALLEY (1951), directed by Richard Thorpe, concentrated upon two men from the same Colorado family, one a biological son, the other adopted, and how they cross swords concerning their father's cattle empire. The feud of the Montagues and the Capulets was again brought to the screen in Renato Castellani's ROMEO AND JULIET (1954). The classic love story was shot in Technicolor in this incarnation, and starred Laurence Harvey, and Susan Shentall in the lead roles. As with previous entries such as ACE OF ACTION and HUNGRY HILL, THE BIG COUNTRY (1958), directed by William Wyler, dealt with two families sparring over land, and how a sailor becomes embroiled in this quarrel. Franco Zeffirelli's ROMEO AND JULIET (1968) was yet another telling of the story of two ill-fated lovers, and family feud, but a movie that captured the mood of the times, making its creators a healthy profit. In the 1968 version Romeo was played by Leonard Whiting, with Olivia Hussey as Juliet. A lighter touch could be found in ANGEL IN MY POCKET (1969), directed by Alan Rafkin. A new pastor in a small town church finds that its founders, being two families, have been feuding for years over anything to do with it, the pastor discovering a way to bring the opposing members to unite. LOLLY-MADONNA XXX contained elements of many of the previous films about family feuds, and took these in completely different directions.

As with the vast majority of films with a family feud at their core, the conflict in LOLLY-MADONNA XXX is between two opposing families, similar to THE ADOPTED SON, BEYOND THE PECOS, TO THE LAST MAN, THE BIG COUNTRY, and others with a rural setting. The wounds are deep for both sides, with much heavy emotional torment present for the characters. Generally the sore point is a battle over land, coupled with romantic entanglements between a member from each family, which in most cases boil over dramatically. Disagreements over land propels much of LOLLY-MADONNA XXX, which brings about death and despair to both sides. In terms of romance, where this film differs is that one of the marriages between two members of opposing families ended prematurely with an accidental death. The death of a daughter-in-law is something that weighed down upon a patriarch, and causes him to finally lose his mind, and kill his son. This attention to characters' complex internal psychological motivations takes the film far and away from the more simplistic situations of entries such as IN OLD KENTUCKY, with its cheerier setup, which does not as such delve deeply into why its characters do what they do. Other features of LOLLY-MADONNA XXX are also worthy of analysis.

Another distinguishing factor of many family feud movies is that the smallest of events can cause a meltdown between both families that brings thoughts, and acts of retaliation to the surface. This is what LOLLY-MADONNA XXX has in common with its predecessors, such as OUR HOSPITALITY. In the case of LOLLY-MADONNA XXX, a faux letter sent from the member of one family, to the other family is the impetus for action, and an innocent young woman, mistaken for the party who wrote the letter, is drawn into the fray. Outsiders brought into conflicts without their consent is something the film shares with ANGEL IN THEIR POCKET. In LOLLY-MADONNA XXX one is given access to Roonie Gill's view about the feud, and how she is essentially powerless to be able to do much to bring about a change in this family feud. The positioning of Roonie in the movie is akin to the viewer wishing to intervene in the feud, and bring about peace between both sides, but being unable to despite her/the viewer's best intentions. This is just one of the factors which makes LOLLY-MADONNA XXX such an incisive, powerful experience. A great addition to movies about family feuds, LOLLY-MADONNA XXX stands out for its vigorous, sincere presentation.

Overview: Richard C. Sarafian was an American director with fifteen films to his credit over a twenty-eight year period. He made a mixture of movies with a leaning toward action and adventure films, but with a thoughtful twist which gave them depth. His first motion picture, TERROR AT BLACK FALLS (1962) was a western about a Mexican gunman whose son was lynched for a crime not of his doing, the gunman subsequently jailed, but plotting revenge once free from jail. Mr Sarafian's next film, ANDY (1965) was the touching story of an intellectually challenged man, and the difficulties both he, and his parents experience in life. At the inception of the 1970s came FRAGMENT OF FEAR (1970). This suspense story of a man becoming enmeshed in the murder investigation of his aunt in Italy starred David Hemmings in the lead role, and Flora Robson as his aunt. One of Richard Sarafian's most-remembered works was VANISHING POINT (1971). The story of a drugged, shady ex-policeman who takes to the road in cars, hotly pursued by the police force, and encountering others along the way, it was an action-packed, profitable film whose reputation has grown considerably over the years. Mr Sarafian next tackled a western, MAN IN THE WILDERNESS (1971), which was about a fur-trapper in 1820s United States and his tenuous story of survival, and heartbreak. He followed this with another western, THE MAN WHO LOVED CAT DANCING (1973). A widower in the American West falls for a woman fleeing from her cruel husband, and the film charts their relationship, and the many obstacles they face in being together. 

SUNBURN (1979) was a comedy vehicle for Farrah Fawcett, about a private eye investigating the death of a man in Mexico, and enlisting the assistance of a woman in this mission, but things are not as they seem. THE BEAR (1984) was the biography of real-life football coach Paul Bryant, nicknamed 'Bear', who presided as coach of the University of Alabama's football team, with Gary Busey in the lead role. Completely different in tone was EYE OF THE TIGER (1986). Again starring Gary Busey in the main part, it was about a Vietnam War veteran, just released from jail, who discovers a motorcycle gang wreaking havoc in his town, and decides to do something about this, with violent results. Similarly action-oriented was Richard Sarafian's penultimate film, STREET JUSTICE (1987). A CIA agent, as with the protagonist of EYE OF THE TIGER, returns home to find things different, this time to ensure the safety of his wife from an unscrupulous, power-hungry family who dominate the town. Mr Sarafian's final movie, SOLAR CRISIS (1990) was a foray into science-fiction territory, with an astronaut seeking to avert a solar flare causing untold damage to the earth by planting a bomb on the sun, but encountering many difficulties. LOLLY-MADONNA XXX was Richard Sarafian's seventh motion picture, and one of his best movies.

Mr Sarafian has crafted a captivating, thought-provoking film with LOLLY-MADONNA XXX. The story of two feuding families in rural Tennessee has received potent, sympathetic treatment from its director. While, at first glance, the reason for the reignited feud between the Gutshall, and Feather families, being a faux letter sent from one family to the other, subsequently drawing a stranger into the fray, may seem far-fetched, the director, writers, and his cast make it work beautifully. Viewers are offered an intimate glimpse into the two core families, and one discovers what makes them tick, their idiosyncratic quirks, which make them all the more real. All the little details and events add up over the course of the movie, leading the spectator to feel for the outcome of its characters. Pacing is excellent, unrushed, but never sluggish. In this respect, scenes are fully-formed and satisfying, giving the viewer sufficient information without overkill. In addition to this, further facets of the movie are worthy of discussion.

LOLLY-MADONNA XXX is also pleasingly subtle in its other areas. Promotional material, such as the film's poster, may lead one to believe that LOLLY-MADONNA XXX is a bloodthirsty, 'shoot-em-up' type of story, with a heavy exploitation appeal, but the execution of the narrative is anything but amoral or vindictive. The violent content occurs in a naturalistic manner, informed by character passions and actions, without ever being over the top or gory. It is not the type of film whereby the deaths are treated in a cartoonish manner, and people dropping like flies in an inhumane way. Everything is always backed up by the story and its characters, and the death scenes themselves are not detailed or gratuitous. The camera does not linger in these moments too long, which is a credit to the movie as a whole. This one tendency lifts LOLLY-MADONNA XXX into a more artistic, nuanced realm of motion pictures. 

In a related manner, the mood of LOLLY-MADONNA XXX is somber and pensive, a quietly suspenseful atmosphere which works. There is the keen impression that the participants in the feud, being the two families, are uncomfortable with it, despite the appearance of drawing guns at a moment's notice. The photographs which are featured of both families at the beginning, and end of the movie give the impression that they were somewhat friendly at various stages, but events occurred which soured that relationship. This gives the film a bittersweet, tragic aura that makes its characters all the more intricate, and definitely not gun toting, violent hillbillies. A great film which deftly explores themes of family, loyalty, and honor, LOLLY-MADONNA XXX is a movie that shows off its director's abilities to excellent effect.

Acting: LOLLY-MADONNA XXX has an illustrious cast of veterans and younger actors who all perform admirably. The director has extracted performances from an ensemble who have been utilized excellently, with everyone showcased in a balanced manner. The movie is headlined by Rod Steiger as Laban, patriarch of the Feather family. In another great performance, Mr Steiger makes his Laban a character who is not a cardboard villain, but someone who believes that what he is doing is right. Mr Steiger, especially in his final scenes, makes the viewer feel sympathy toward him, despite a particularly nefarious act. As Laban's foe Pap Gutshall, Robert Ryan shows why he was one of the best-ever actors from Classic Hollywood. With his square jaw, intense gaze, and unflappable demeanor, Mr Ryan is utterly convincing as the determined Pap. As wife Elspeth, Tresa Hughes has many fine moments, especially the revealing scenes with Joan Goodfellow as daughter Sister E, where events are inferred, but powerfully presented. Kiel Martin supercharges passion as Ludie Gutshall, the trigger-happy eldest son in the family. An actor who brought excitement and danger to the movie, the handsome Mr Martin is a performer gone too soon before one could see further excellent interpretations. Jeff Bridges brings another memorable character to life as Zack Feather in the movie. With his distinctive voice and all-out sincerity, Mr Bridges makes his transition from pacifist, to protector of his family, with ease and credibility. As his love interest, Season Hubley makes an auspicious debut as Roonie Gill, the young woman caught in the crossfire between the two warring families. An attractive actress perfectly cast as the foil in the film, she does very well as the empathetic, sensitive Roonie. Six other actors also do marvelous work in LOLLY-MADONNA XXX.

Ed Lauter, as Hawk Feather, with his bald pate and flashing eyes, does wonders as the man with aspirations of being a rock star. A distinctive-looking actor, he is given many opportunities in both comic, and dramatic moments, and pulls all of these off with élan. As Sister E Gutshall, Joan Goodfellow, in her film debut, is another striking actress. An actress who struck gold as Billie in 1974's BUSTER AND BILLIE, here she is equally commanding, as the quiet young woman who seems to attract both attention, and trouble. With her cold-eyed stare and quiet disposition, which say more than any dialogue could, she is excellent in the first of her three screen roles. Scott Wilson, as Thrush Feather, shares some amazing scenes with Rod Steiger which propel the movie in its final stages. An actor with a friendly visage that makes him suitable for villainous roles, he is likewise admirable. As the youngest Feather son Finch, Randy Quaid is masterful. As with Joan Goodfellow, he is given a dearth of dialogue in the film, but his body language, and facial expressions say it all as the quiet, perceptive Finch. Another striking character portrait is by the reliable Gary Busey as Zeb Gutshall. With his trademark smile and singular easy-going ways, Mr Busey creates yet another affecting screen portrayal, making his exit in the movie shocking to witness. The final acting of note in LOLLY-MADONNA XXX was by Paul Koslo as Villum Gutshall. Specialising in playing characters on the edges of society, such as in WELCOME HOME SOLDIER BOYS, Mr Koslo is superlative even though he does not have as much screen time as other performers, his final scenes a tour-de-force.

Soundtrack: The musical theme of LOLLY-MADONNA XXX, composed by Fred Myrow, is a brilliant, moody, quiet piece that formidably complements what is taking place onscreen. Played at both the beginning, and end of the film, it perfectly sums up the contemplative, sad tone which LOLLY-MADONNA XXX expresses so well. Incidental music played at various intervals, such as the thoughtful scenes between Zach and Roonie, is always well-judged, never upstaging the visuals.

Mise-en-scene: LOLLY-MADONNA XXX has meticulous attention to detail in its mise-en-scene. Cinematography by Philip Lathrop is beautiful, with just the right amount of colour without becoming washed out. This is particularly effective in highlighting the landscapes, and homes of the film's core families, lending the movie a subtle touch which is in keeping with the somber tone throughout. Set decoration by James Payne is another striking feature of the film. The homes of the Gutshall, and Feather families are where the majority of the action occurs, and these exude a country atmosphere in their styling. The sets seem as if people lived there in actuality, which is a testament to My Payne's hard work. Aside from this, the use of black and white photographs of both families at the beginning, and conclusion of the movie, is a splendid move. It allows the audience to compare their perceptions of the characters, what has occurred in the film from start to finish, and what they have learned after watching LOLLY-MADONNA XXX unfold.

Notable Acting Performances: Rod Steiger, Robert Ryan, Tresa Hughes, Kiel Martin, Jeff Bridges, Season Hubley, Ed Lauter, Joan Goodfellow, Scott Wilson, Randy Quaid, Gary Busey, Paul Koslo.

Suitability for young viewers: No. Infrequent coarse language, brief female nudity, adult themes, high-level violence.

Overall Grade: A

Link: IMDB Page