TOOTSIE

(December 1982, U.S.)

Ladies and gentlemen, and children of all ages - allow me to tell you a story about the late Sidney Pollack's film TOOTSIE, and how it related to my youth when I was fifteen years old.
In March 1982, I got into a big fight with my mother because I told her I was seeing the movie VICTOR/VICTORIA with a friend. She absolutely refused to allow me to see "a movie like that", as she put it. "Like what?", I replied. She proceeded to describe how the movie was about degenerate people who dressed up in drag costumes. "Mom, it’s a musical!" I said, to which she concluded the fight by declaring, "I don’t care!" It took me a while to understand her (unreasonable) feelings, but it appeared my mother suffered from some form of homophobia. Nonetheless, I was faced with the embarrassing task of telling my friend I couldn’t go to the movie. When he asked why, I made up a silly excuse because, frankly, I just couldn’t wrap my head around the real reason. I mean, it was just a movie; it’s not like I was going to a porn theater in Manhattan. This memory is relevant to me because by the end of that same year, when my family prepared to see TOOTSIE, I started a conversation with my mother that went something like this,

"Mom, do you remember last spring when you wouldn’t let me see Victor/Victoria?"
"Yes. What about it?"
"That was a movie about a woman who dressed like a man. How come we’re going to see a movie about a man who dresses like a woman?"
"This movie is different."
"Why?"
"Because it’s funny!"

Was she serious? What the hell did that mean? Whatever logical conviction she thought made sense to her, made absolutely no sense to me. There was a hypocrisy taking place here that I didn’t understand. Unfortunately, when you’re a kid who’s practically been told to shut up by his mother, you simply do it without argument because you just want to go to the movies with your family in peace.

Despite my love for the movies, I never once had any aspirations to be an actor. My conviction is confirmed with TOOTSIE. Listening to Michael Dorsey (played by Dustin Hoffman, whom I remembered well from KRAMER VS. KRAMER), I believed actors spent their lives looking for work and not getting any. Instead, they ended up as waiters in restaurants. Despite these difficulties, Michael is determined to make it as an actor and encouraged his friends to have the same discipline and commitment. As a perfectionist, however, Michael is impossible to work with. Even his well-known agent George Fields (played by director himself Sidney Pollack) can't help him. During an argument in George’s office, he and Michael shout at each other about the time Michael played a tomato for a commercial and refused to sit down. This is still the funniest and most stupid argument I've ever heard in a movie. To finally get a good paying job, Michael goes to extremes and auditions for a female part on a soap opera dressed as a woman. Instead of Michael Dorsey, he goes by the name of Dorothy Michaels. It works because he gets the part by performing the role as a tough, no-nonsense feminist who won't take crap from men. He fools them all and he even fools his agent for a time, when he meets him at the Russian Tea Room. The moment when George is shocked to see how Michael has transformed himself is hilarious not just because of the surprise element, but also because of the look on poor George’s face when he realizes just how far Michael has gone to get a job. This is a rare moment where I can appreciate just how far one’s facial expression can take a scene in a movie. Sometimes words weren’t necessary to get the point across.

As Dorothy becomes a TV soap opera sensation, Michael is living two lives and is intrigued by just how far he can take his new female personality. In a scene inside the bedroom of his best friend Sandy (played by Teri Garr), he stands in front of her mirror staring at himself, alters his facial expression, and says, "Why, yes!" at himself in a feminine voice. Then he gets undressed while Sandy is in the shower so he can try on one of her dresses. She catches him in his underwear, and the only way he can get out of the situation is to tell her that he wants her, even if he really doesn't, because after all, they're just friends:

"Sandy, I want you.", he says as he walks toward her in his underwear.
"You want me?", she asks in disbelief pointing to her own body, lacking any self-esteem.

This isn’t much dialogue, but it says wonders about the two characters, their history as friends, and the drastic step they're about to take. The unexpected sex between them begins an act of deception by Michael toward Sandy. At the same time, Michael is falling in love with his beautiful co-star Julie (played by Jessica Lange), who only knows him as Dorothy and who's also dating the show’s director, Ron (played by Dabney Coleman). By all accounts, he's a sexist and a total jerk because of the way he disrespects the women in his life. There's a scene at a party which teaches us a great deal about the flaws of human nature in which Michael is there (as Michael) with George, and Julie is there, too. In a previous scene, at Julie’s apartment, she confesses to Dorothy that it would be a relief if just once a guy would come up to her and skip the usual pick-up lines and role playing and just come right out and say, "I find you very interesting and I’d really like to make love to you." Having that knowledge, Michael repeats that very line to Julie at the party. It backfires when, instead of being relieved and flattered, she throws her drink in his face. It seems that people, regardless of what they may say to other people, don't necessarily want what they said to actually happen, and if it do, they won't necessarily react the way they thought they would. In other words, be careful what you wish for, you may get it.

As Dorothy, life gets very complicated. On top of everything else, she's being pursued by two men; Julie’s father and an older cast member on the show. Do men really find Dorothy attractive? Sorry, but I just don't see it. As a straight man, Michael fights off such advances (Julie’s father even proposes marriage and gives her/him a ring).
If Michael doesn't think of something fast, he’ll spend the rest of his life as Dorothy Michaels. The opportunity to get out of this gig presents itself when the show is in the unexpected situation of having to perform a party scene live instead of being taped. Before we know what's happening, Dorothy is off on an uncontrollable verbal rant, improvising a strange backstory as she goes along, almost to the point of a stuttering panic. Finally, at the crucial moment, with the audience watching live (including Sandy and Julie’s father), Dorothy wipes off her makeup, takes off her wig, and reveals herself to be Michael Dorsey. The jig is up, the mask is off, and Michael is free, but not before he receives a good punch in the stomach from Julie. The aftermath is what you'd expect, with Michael making amends with those he hurt, including Julie and her father, too. She confesses to missing Dorothy, and Michael tries to make it better by telling her, "I was a better man with you as a woman than I ever was with a woman as a man." She forgives him when she askes him to lend her a yellow dress.

My family and I not only loved TOOTSIE when we first saw it in 1982, but it was one of the most fun times we’d had at the movies in a long time. Laughter being contagious, it was always a pleasure to see my mother let herself go for two hours and give in to the feeling and freedom of allowing herself the joy to laugh at wild situations and stupidity. My own laughter at such a movie took on extra meaning because I was able to share it with someone who didn’t laugh too much at the movies. However, I still never got a reasonable explanation to why TOOTSIE was acceptable and VICTOR/VICTORIA wasn’t. In a way, this movie represented strange timing for me because I’d recently gotten caught up in the popular ABC soap opera General Hospital. It started in 1981 when nearly every kid in my high school freshman class was going on about the wedding of Luke and Laura as the biggest event on TV. Plagued by curiosity, I couldn’t resist seeing what all the hubbub was about. Well, after one hour of drama and intrigue, I had to see what would happen in the next episode…and the next…and the next (I surrendered nine years of my life to that show until 1990, when I finally decided the writing became too stupid to bother with anymore). Watching the actions and drama of the soap opera in TOOTSIE gave me a somewhat interesting insight as to what possibly went on behind the camera of a real-life soap opera…minus the man in drag, of course.

The film remains one of the funniest I’ve ever seen (the "tomato" argument still cracks me up every time). It’s noteworthy that in his long career, this was the only real comedy Sydney Pollack ever directed (sorry, but THE ELECTRIC HORSEMAN just wasn’t funny). Besides paying homage to the Billy Wilder classic SOME LIKE IT HOT (1959), as well as other slapstick comedies of the 1940s, the film perfectly combines the outrageous farce of the modern TV soap opera and New York City show business with relevant social points about sexism. At the beginning of the film, we’re unclear on Michael’s position on women, having no romantic interest in his life. As his life progresses as Dorothy Michaels, however, he develops a better understanding of women as he lives through his own hell in their shoes. Aside from the defense he’s forced to maintain against men who want him physically, he preaches his own public sermon regarding a woman’s need for respect and to be treated fairly and equally among men. At the very least, they should be referred to by their name and not some cheap pet name like honey, baby, or "Tootsie".

As the traditional situation comedy, this is far from traditional (forget even the best set of circumstances you’ve seen on classic situation comedies like I LOVE LUCY or THREE'S COMPANY). The film doesn’t go off half-cocked by trying to shove cheap laughs in our face. Those responsible for writing it use as much common sense as possible. Michael isn’t going all out in drag just to deceive people or pretend to be something he’s not for his own personal gratification. This is a man that’s been mostly unemployed for twenty years and enough is finally enough. When the chance presents itself to work steadily for a good paycheck, Michael does what he has to do, even if it means screwing his best friend Sandy out of a possible audition he could’ve helped her get. Whatever moral intentions and obligations that follow his acting success are primarily fueled by his love for Julie, and the fact that one of the reasons he can’t have her (besides the obvious) is because she’s lowered her own standards to be the girlfriend of her chauvinist pig director. To have to watch a woman he cares about go through this brings out his own need to try and improve the lives of other woman, both on TV as a character actress and in real life with Julie.
Dorothy is not attractive, and Micheal knows this. She is, however, very well-groomed and very confident in herself, and it’s this alone that likely makes her a turn-on to certain men who admire these qualities and even find them sexy. Despite being a kind woman with a big heart, she also knows how to defend herself very well against those who go too far with her (even men on the street who try to take her taxi away from her), the reason being because as a man who was, perhaps, also a chauvinist before he put on the dress, is finally learning how it feels at the other end.

The film is perfectly cast. I can’t think of any combination of actors in which the chemistry doesn’t work well. From Dustin Hoffman and Bill Murray as roommates, to Dustin and Jessica as girlfriends, to Dustin and Sydney Pollack biting each other’s head off. Pollack is particularly funny as Michael’s nervous and impatient agent trying to cope with his clients insane antics. I can only feel for the poor man immediately wanting a double vodka when he sees just how far Michael went to get ahead in show business. The tomato argument is played out so flawlessly, I’d find it hard to believe if the two men didn’t get it right in just the first take. The two of them make you believe that an otherwise intelligent man would throw away a good job opportunity simply because he cannot comprehend the logic behind a tomato that’s required to sit down. TOOTSIE is, in its own special way, a poignant film of laughter that reminded us of the pleasure of life’s silliness, even while maintaining its common sense, its intelligence, and its social messages.

How can you go wrong with that?

Favorite line or dialogue:

Michael Dorsey: "Are you saying that nobody in New York will work with me?"
George Fields: "No, no, that's too limited. Nobody in Hollywood wants to work with you either. I can't even send you up for a commercial. You played a tomato for thirty seconds, they went a half a day over schedule because you wouldn't sit down."
Michael: "Yes, it wasn't logical."
George: "YOU WERE A TOMATO! A tomato doesn't have logic! A tomato can't move!"
Michael: "That's what I said! So if he can't move, how's he gonna sit down, George? I was a stand-up tomato: a juicy, sexy, beefsteak tomato! Nobody does vegetables like me!
I did an evening of vegetables off-Broadway! I did the best tomato, the best cucumber, I did an endive salad that knocked the critics on their ass!"

TOMORROW NEVER DIES

(December 1997, U.S.)

On December 31, 1997, I experienced my final New Year's Eve before meeting the woman who'd one day become my wife. On January 1, 1998, I went to see TOMORROW NEVER DIES with my ex-girlfriend who was as much a James Bond fan as I was. Honestly, the two dates have absolutely nothing to do with each other. I just thought it would be a different way to introduce this post to an otherwise fun and formulaic James Bond movie.

So, imagine a Bond movie with a touch of Sidney Lumet's NETWORK (1976) and Orson Welles's' CITIZEN KANE (1941), in which Bond (played by Pierce Brosnan for the second time) attempts to defeat power-mad media baron Elliot Carver (played by Jonathan Pryce in a role intended to pay homage to American newspaper publisher William Randolph Hearst) from influencing world events that could inevitably lead to World War III. "M" (played by Judi Dench for the second time) sends Bond to investigate Carver after he releases fake news article about a crisis in the South China Sea hours before MI6 has learned about it. Arriving in Hamburg, Bond attends a a major media event sponsored by Carver, and in the process, seduces his ex-girlfriend Paris (played by Teri Hatcher) who also happens to be Carver's wife, while trying to obtain information from her. Like so many other "secondary" Bond girls before her, Paris is killed when Carver discovers the truth between her and Bond. But fortunately, not before we get a good look at her ass behind black panties and garters...

Traveling to the South China Sea, Bond meets Chinese agent Wai Lin (played by Michelle Yeoh) who's on the same case. Working together now, the experience thrills, chills, perils, capture and escapes as they work with the Royal Navy and the People's Liberation Army Air Force to explain Carver's ultimate plot, which is to destroy the Chinese government with a stolen missile, allowing a Chinese general to step in and stop war between China and Great Britain, both of which have waged a naval war against each other. Following the conflict, Carver will achieve exclusive broadcasting rights in China. But like any other Bond crisis, the great villain is defeated and killed by our British hero, and he and the "Bond girl" share their final romantic moment before the end credits rolls.

If I seem limited in how much I'm saying about this James Bond film, it's probably true. In a spy franchise that's been around for fifty-eight years, you eventually get to the point where the traditional formulas of these movies become almost indescribable for anything truly new, unique or original. Don't get me wrong - TOMORROW NEVER DIES is a fun Bond film with plenty of action to keep one interested, and Pierce Brosan continues to prove he was a good choice as the new Bond for the '90s. But it's this second go-around where things are starting to slip a little. Whatever dark tones his persona may have exhibited in GOLDENEYE (1995) are starting to slip as he begins to give in to the silly puns and jokes that typically turn any Bond film into something cheesy. It's even a shame to see a truly gifted actor like Judi Dench give in to lame puns like, "You just have to pump her for information." The film ultimately does its job by providing the excitement and style we've come to expect from the legendary British agent, though how seriously we're supposed to take the nature of evil when it falls into the hands of media news is entirely up to the individual. Remember, this is still the '90s, before TV and media influence were as serious a threat as they are today with networks like FOX News. Still, the message of TV and the media's influence on our lives even back then is evident.

Michelle Yeoh is perhaps the most badass Bond girl in the entire franchise, which leaves me to question exactly what we want from our Bond girls. Do we prefer them to be the independent women of strength and power as in this film and those of the past like GOLDFINGER, or do we prefer them to be more dependent and even helpless as in DR. NO or LIVE AND LET DIE. Before we automatically choose the former, let's consider and ask ourselves why Ursula Andress is still one of the most popular, if not the most popular Bond girl of all time. Sheryl Crow provides one of the better Bond opening theme songs I've heard since Duran Duran in 1985, with a combination of seduction and pure anger. And if anyone is fitting to replace Desmond Llewelyn wisecracking role of "Q", who better than MONTY PYTHON and FAWLTY TOWERS legend John Cleese?

But really, all of what I'm writing here may be considered trivial, at best. The real question is...what does Richard K. think of TOMORROW NEVER DIES? Let's all just wait and see...

Favorite line or dialogue:

Elliot Carver: "Mr. Wallace, call the President. Tell him if he doesn't sign the bill lowering the cable rates, we will release the video of him with the cheerleader in the Chicago motel room."
Mr. Wallace: "Inspired, sir."
Carver: "And after he signs the bill, release the tape anyway."

TO LIVE AND DIE IN L.A.

(November 1985, U.S.)

When TO LIVE AND DIE IN L.A. was released in 1985, I more or less dismissed it as another cop movie, despite my love for William Friedkin's THE FRENCH CONNECTION (1971) and THE EXORCIST (1973). Then in the summer of 1986, I saw Michael Mann's MANHUNTER with William Peterson (later of CSI fame), and I was immediately taken by not only his outstanding performance, but the film itself. Realizing only then that Peterson was the star of TO LIVE AND DIE IN L.A., I wasted no time in renting the movie. While it was certainly no FRENCH CONNECTION, it was, nonetheless, an impressive neo-noir action thriller with talented, unknown actors (at the time) and a new wave soundtrack by Wang Chung in the age of the MTV 1980s.

Peterson plays Secret Service agent Richard Chance, assigned as a counterfeiting investigator in its Los Angeles office. With a dangerous reputation of recklessness, Chance is determined to nail notorious counterfeiter Rick Masters by any means necessary (played by Willem DaFoe) after Masters murders his partner who was just three days away from retirement. His new partner John Vukovich (played by John Pankow) is more of a straight-shooter who does his job by the book, and must contend and keep up with Chance's recklessness and unethical practices.

After several attempts at surveillance and unsuccessful arrests of Master's known associates, the two agents are able to finally meet with Masters undercover as Palm Springs bankers interested in his counterfeiting services. But the agents needs to put up thirty thousand dollars front money to make the but, money the department cannot grant them. So Chance's solution is to kidnap and rob a man carrying fifty thousand dollars in cash to purchase stolen diamonds. This is heist gone terribly wrong, when the man is not only killed during the robbery, but inevitably leads to a high speed chase through the streets and highways of L.A. (Friedkin clearly trying to continue a reputation for a killer car chase sequence he started in THE FRENCH CONNECTION). Then they discover that the man they robbed and got killed was actually an undercover agent on a sting operation for the FBI. Chance is apathetic by his mistake, still determined to get Masters, while Vukovich is on the verge of a nervous breakdown from his guilt of their crime.

The two agents meet with Masters for the exchange, and that, too, goes terribly wrong, resulting in a shootout and Chance's death (sorry for the spoiler). Masters escapes, but is eventually caught and shot by Vukovich during a moment of blazing inferno inside a warehouse, in which Masters burns to death following his gunshot wounds. Vukovich is a changed man now, becoming the same sort of "whatever it takes" agent that his former partner Chance was.

William Friedkin is not a perfect director. Some of his films are classics, some are hardly that at all. TO LIVE AND DIE IN L.A. may have easily been considered a comeback film after a series of less-than-great titles that began with SORCERER in 1977 (actually, I like that one). In the age of MTV and MIAMI VICE, the film is stylish, flamboyant, dazzling and perhaps even over the top in comparison to other crime films of the genre that offer a harder, darker edge to them. William Peterson is tough and smart, and easily comparable to someone like the late Steve McQueen in films like BULLIT and THE THOMAS CROWN AFFAIR. The city of Los Angeles is certainly no California paradise in its depiction of not only crime, but its grimy settings and cinematography. Even by today's standards of crime and cops, the film remains an effective study in police corruption and the immoral and brutal choices that ultimately corrupt one's soul. Friedkin successfully represents a cynical and nasty side of life in the city that may easily be considered the West coast version of his New York City in the early 1970s (I think Popeye Doyle and Richard Chance would have been good friends).

Favorite line or dialogue:

Rick Masters : "First you rip me off, then you set up Carl, now you want to fuck my lady?"

TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD

(December 1962, U.S.)

Like so many, I read Harper Lee's TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD in high school, and I'm sorry to say I remember almost none of it. Like too many of my generation (and others, I'm sure) I've come to rely on the movies for even my knowledge of popular literature, because we're often apt to watch movies multiple time instead of reading books more than one time. Truth be told, there are times when I embrace this classic tale as nothing more than a series of vignettes and episodes in what is otherwise nothing more or less than a coming of age story of two children in Maycomb, Alabama, during the Great Depression of the early 1930s. To cling to that opinion would be ignorant, though, if not a crime in the world of literature (both in print and on film). While I may not fully appreciate the reasons for Lee's novel earning the Pulitzer Prize, I cannot deny the story content as it fits in the world of racism, civil rights, and basic human decency.

The story is narrated by the adult Jean Louise Finch, or "Scout", as she prefers to be called. Scout and her older brother Jem live modestly (despite the town's poverty that surrounds them), and enjoy a happy, carefree childhood with their father, Atticus Finch (played by Gregory Peck) and the family housekeeper, Calpurnia. Their summer is filled with games that include searching for "Boo" Radley, the reclusive and mysterious neighbor who's gained the reputation of being the town oddball. On several occasions, Jem has discovered small objects (including a broken stop watch, a pocket knife and two carved soap dolls resembling him and Scout) left inside the knothole of a tree on the Radley property.

As the town lawyer (and seemingly the only decent and moral man in town), he believes in fair treatment for all and turning the other cheek to defend your beliefs (oh, that sounds so good on paper). When he's appointed to defend Tom Robinson (played by Brock Peters, later of STAR TREK IV and VI fame) who's accused of raping a white girl, he exposes himself and his children to the town's harsh racism. Tensions are raised when Atticus declares his belief that Tom is innocent of the crime he's accused of, and is even forced to sit in front of the local jail to safeguard Tom from an angry lynch mob. The trial itself is intriguing, as Atticus mounts evidence that appear to exonerate Tom, including the fact that Tom has only one working hand, as well as the fact that the victim's father is prone to fits of violent rage whenever he's been drinking. Before the verdict is handed down, it appears as though the white girl kissed and seduced Tom, and was subsequently beaten by her father as a result for her seducing a black man. In his closing argument, Atticus asks the all-white male jury to cast aside their prejudices and focus on Tom's obvious innocence. Such a plea is futile, because a black man like Tom in a racist town like Maycomb doesn't stand a chance. Tom is found guilty and is later killed during his transfer to prison while attempting to escape.

We might expect the story of TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD to conclude with this sort of climactic tragedy, but the story chooses to not only resume the journey of Scout and Jem, specifically on Halloween night when the two are violently attacked in the woods, but to also point out the lessons of prejudging another human being, when it's revealed that it was, indeed, Arthur "Boo" Radley who not only saved the children by killing their attacker, but also that he appears to be a very shy and gentle soul. Scout concludes the film by drawing an analogy which compares the unwelcome public attention that would have been heaped on "Boo" with the killing of a mockingbird that does nothing but sing to make people happy.

TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD is surely a message film that seeks to tear at our social conscience, to not only remind us of a time when racism ruled our souls, but perhaps to also remind us that we haven't come very far in the years since. This is surely Gregory Peck's finest role in a career that must stand up against other classic titles like Hitchcok's SPELLBOUND, GENTLEMEN'S AGREEMENT, CAPE FEAR, THE GUNS OF NAVARONE and even THE OMEN. As Atticus Finch, his goodness must not only do battle with a town population surviving on their ignorance, but also to help his children grow up in a world they're slowly discovering is filled with evil during the course of their carefree innocence in a time that is supposed to 1930's small town Alabama, in which an honest white man must stand up and fight for the life a helpless black man. There is truly intense drama during the scene in which Atticus faces the armed lynch mob, ready to break into the jailhouse and hang Tom Robinson, and yet we cannot ignore that it's also the innocence of children who save the day, when Scout and Jem arrive unexpectedly on the scene and manage to innocently shame the men of the mob into retreating in peace. Could children possibly do such a thing at that time in real life, or in this life now? It's a nice idea to dream about, I suppose.

Favorite line or dialogue:

Atticus Finch: "I remember when my daddy gave me that gun. He told me that I should never point it at anything in the house, and that he'd rather I'd shoot at tin cans in the backyard. But he said that sooner or later he supposed the temptation to go after birds would be too much, and that I could shoot all the blue jays I wanted, if I could hit 'em, but to remember it was a sin to kill a mockingbird. Well, I reckon because mockingbirds don't do anything but make music for us to enjoy. They don't eat people's gardens, don't nest in the corncrib, they don't do one thing but just sing their hearts out for us."

TO HAVE AND HAVE NOT

(October 1944, U.S.)

If you're familiar enough with the Golden Age of Hollywood, then I suppose you're familiar enough with the off-screen romance and eventual marriage between legends Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall. That in mind, I can't help but watch their first of four films together, TO HAVE AND HAVE NOT with a pair of wider eyes, trying to see just what it was that sparked their initial chemistry and heat that would inevitably lead to Hollywood history.

The story, loosely based on Ernest Hemingway's 1937 novel, centers on the romance between charter fisherman Harry Morgan (Bogart) living in Martinique and American drifter "Slim" (Bacall), which is complicated by the growing French resistance in Vichy France during World War II. Harry makes a modest living with tourists alongside his drunken mate Eddie (played by Walter Brennan). The island of Martinique is a haven harboring assorted people sympathetic to a Free France. While Harry stays at his hotel home owned by "Frenchy" (to his English-speaking customers), he's urged to help the French Resistance by smuggling in some people onto the island with his boat. Refusing at first, he reluctantly accepts when he not only hooks up with "Slim" and wants to help her get out of Martinique, but also finds himself dead broke. Upon picking up his cargo, a young married couple, his boat is seen and fired up by a navy patrol boat. The male passenger is wounded, but Harry manages to escape by turning his boat into a dense fog bank.

Returning to the hotel, Harry is able to apply his experience with gunshot wounds to remove the bullet from his wounded passenger. Still seeking Harry's assistance in their operation, he continues to respectfully turn them down. When the police arrive, they confront Harry, having recognized his boat from the night before. They also reveal they're holding Eddie and will exploit his drinking problem to get the information they require about the smuggling plot. His back against the wall, Harry acts with "Slim's" help, and gains control of a hidden gun and the situation he's faced with, turning the tables on the police and killing one of them in the process. He forces the police captain to release Eddie, and the two of them with "Slim" escape on Harry's boat, having finally agreed to help with the mission for the French Resistance.

It's curious to note the theme of fishing in TO HAVE AND HAVE NOT, because it was apparently during a fishing trip that director Howard Hawks tried to convince his friend Hemingway to write the script, despite Hemingway's disinterest in working in Hollywood. I also have to say that I've never been truly convinced of the line that apparently put Bacall on the map when she told Bogart, "You know how to whistle, don't you Steve? You just put your lips together and blow." I'm sure there's plenty of sexual innuendo behind it, even for the 1940s, but I still just don't get it. Still, one can't deny the strong connection between Bogart and Bacall which continued in three more films (including THE BIG SLEEP and KEY LARGO). While this film is certainly no CASABLANCA, it remains a solid romantic melodrama with the traditional Bogart wit his fans love. However, I personally can't help but feel cheated when the film ends the moment the main characters decide to leave the island, their police enemies still undefeated and the story lacking any credible closure. Regardless, I suppose if you're even a small fan of the Bogey-Bacall screen phenomenon, you take what you can get and try to enjoy it.

Favorite line or dialogue:

Harry Morgan: "Johnson's my client."
Slim: "He doesn't speak so well of you."
Harry: "He's still my client. You ought to pick on someone to steal from who doesn't owe me money."

TO GILLIAN ON HER 37TH BIRTHDAY

(October 1996, U.S.)

TO GILLIAN ON HER 37TH BIRTHDAY is a story about loss, and as I sit and write this blog post, I'm dealing with a loss of my own; the same loss every fan of the Canadian rock band Rush is dealing with upon learning the news of the death of drummer Neil Peart (so naturally, I'm listening to the music of Rush as I write this).

By the time I saw this film when it was released on video, it was the summer of 1997, and I'd just re-opened the beach house in Westhampton Beach that had been in the family for nearly twenty years. I'd always been a sucker for poignant stories that took place on the beach (think SUMMER OF '42, as an example), so my interest was immediate. What I didn't expect was an almost atypical ghost story in the tradition of GHOST (1990), but without the thrills. I was instantly drawn to David Lewis's (played by Peter Gallagher) Nantucket beach house and it's isolation from neighbors and town's hustle and bustle. The beach and the ocean right outside his doorstep was an easy way for him to lose himself in his own private world after the loss of his beautiful wife Gillian (played by Michelle Pfeiffer) two years earlier when she foolishly climbed the mast of their sailboat and fell to her death. David is so affected by her death, that he willingly and knowingly communicates with Gillian's spirit as if she were standing right in front of him, while unwittingly neglecting his daughter Rachel (played by Claire Danes).

During a family weekend gathering, in what's supposed to be the second anniversary celebration of Gillain (who happened to die on her birthday), David's sister in-law and her husband have brought with them a woman they hope will spark a romantic interest in David's heart. No such luck. David ignores her and proceeds with a series of rituals to celebrate his deceased wife's birthday. The events of the weekend prompt the grown-ups to re-examine their own lives and relationships, while Rachel's best friend Cindy (played by Laurie Fortier) has no problem being as provocative as she can, even while showing off her developing body on the beach (sorry, no pictures, as that would be inappropriate due to her character being underage). It's not until Rachel has a very realistic nightmare about her mother that David finally realizes his isolation and self-indulgent fantasies are hurting his daughter, and finally agrees to her moving in with her aunt and uncle permanently. He also comes to realize he must close the beach house and move back to Boston in order to move on with his own life...and above all, to give up the ghost, while not betraying the memory of his beloved wife.

It's easy enough to simply dismiss this film as just another tearjerker that could've easily been a TV movie on the Lifetime network instead of a theatrical release. The story and performances are solid enough (particularly Claire Danes's anguish as the troubled daughter), though hardly worthy of Oscar mentions. The exterior shots of the beach and the ocean offer the traditional sort of moonlight and magic one might expect from such a setting.

Beyond all of this, I suppose the film needs to feel personal to the one who's watching it. As I mentioned, I'm a sucker for beach stories (though I'm not a fan of Bette Midler in BEACHES), particularly it its power to heal painful emotions and experiences (always worked for me). The timing of my seeing this film was effective in that by the time I saw it in 1997, I was alone in the family beach house and struggling with my own painful memories of love lost. However, upon seeing GILLIAN and it's ultimate message of closure, I was inspired to take a daring step in my own life that would bring closure of my own. I contacted a woman I'd once been in love with and had also ended things badly with. After nearly four years of not speaking to each other, I was inspired to reach out to her in order to finally settle my demons with her so that I could finally move on with my life. In a nutshell, my efforts paid off. I settled things, I moved on, and soon met the woman who would one day become my wife.

You see - this is the point I've always tried to make - that movies continue to have the power to inspire us in our own personal lives. They may not be great movies, but if they managed to touch a nerve within us, then they work, nonetheless.

So thank you GILLIAN for touching that nerve within me.

Favorite line or dialogue:

Cindy Bayles: "Live people can't compete with dead ones."

TO CATCH A THIEF

(August 1955, U.S.)

Happy New Year to all of my readers! I said I'd be back, and here I am...and what better way to return than with the all-mighty Alfred Hitchcock. But while TO CATCH AT THIEF is a great film, it's not necessarily a great Alfred Hitchcock film. As the "Master of Suspense", Hitchcock will be forever known as the genius behind great thrillers like PSYCHO, THE BIRDS, VERTIGO, NORTH BY NORTHWEST and NOTORIOUS, just to name some. But we have to remember that every once in a while, Hitchcock told stories that often concentrated more on romance and intrigue rather than hardcore suspense. While TO CATCH A THIEF may play up on the traditional cat-and-mouse tactics of who-did-what-and-how, it's surely the on-screen chemistry between Cary Grant and Grace Kelly against the cinematic backdrop of the French Riviera that captures our attention and our hearts.

As cat burglar John Robie (also known as "the Cat"), Grant is retired and looking to save his reformed reputation by tracking down and catching an imposter burglar who's been victimizing the wealthy tourists of the Riviera. An ongoing pattern of jewel robberies leads the French police to believe that Robie has come out of his alleged retirement of growing flowers and grapes to resume his life of crime. When they try to arrest him, Robie gives them the slip and looks to clear his name by consulting his former gang (now restaurant workers) who were paroled for their efforts in the French Resistance during World War II. They're the first to suspect Robie of the recent crimes, and it's the restaurant's owner's daughter Danielle (played by Brigitte Auber) who gets him to safety due to the fact that she has a crush on him.

Determined to catch the thief, Robie works with insurance man H.H. Hughson (played by John Williams), who provides him with a list of the most expensive jewelry owners currently vacationing on the Riviera. A rich widow and her daughter Frances (Kelly), are the ones that top the list. Robie befriends them, and is immediately attracted to Frances (because who wouldn't be attracted to Grace Kelly?), while her reaction to him is modest, at best. Robie maintains his facade as a wealthy American tourist, despite Danielle's jealousy of the new relationship between him and Frances. Frances is no fool, however, and easily sees through Robie's cover, playfully confronting him about his true identity, even teasing him with her priceless jewels, and offering up herself as a partner who can share in his life of crime. This moment ends with an unforgettable visual scene of distant fireworks in the night sky as they kiss for the first time (this is also a moment when we should remember that Hitchcock could be a master or romance, as well as suspense). The next morning, the jewels belonging to Frances's mother are gone, and Frances wastes no time in accusing Robie, demanding he give them back to her, and accusing him of using her as a romantic distraction so he could steal the jewelry.

Again, Robie disappears before the police can catch him, and proceeds to stake out a targeted estate. He struggles with an attacker (Danielle's father) who ends up dying in the fight. The police are satisfied they have their man as the accused jewel thief, but Robie is not convinced, citing that the attacker had a wooden leg and couldn't have possibly climbed all those rooftops to steal the jewels. As the love develops between Robie and Frances, the investigating to the thief's true identity draws closer. When the film climaxes on yet another rooftop, we learn that Danielle is the true thief (truth be told, it's not to hard to figure that out while you're watching the film) when she's forced to confess loudly to the police below while she dangles from the rooftop ledge. The thief is caught, love prevails, and the French Riviera continues to shine brightly on the screen before us...

As is often the case, a film shot on location in such a vivid and colorful manner often entices its viewer to fantasize of its reality. I'm no exception - I've wanted to visit the French Riviera ever since I first saw TO CATCH A THIEF, and I'm still awaiting the opportunity to go there. Beyond that inspiration for luxurious world travel, the film may be regarded with mixed reactions, at best, in the grand scheme of Hitchcock's impressive career. The film certainly lacks the true suspense that one comes to expect from Hitchcock, so it becomes necessary to embrace the film on a different level, mainly its visual setting and romantic intrigue between its two major stars. Cary Grant and Grace Kelly express a sly and grand seduction toward each other, and their performances strongly support that seduction. In the daring cat-and-mouse process in which Grant seeks to clear his name, we concentrate on his tight and fast-paced technique against the backdrop of dramatic developments. These developments are not particularly exciting or suspenseful, but again, when we're so delighted and seduced by a locale that provides wealth, romance and intrigue, perhaps it's one of those moments when we give our traditional expectations of Hitchcock a break, and embrace the alternate possibilities of what defines suspense. Whether it works or not depends our our ability to open our minds and hearts to a filmmaker who had so much to tell us, in so many different ways and places. Perhaps that's what made Hitchcock so special.

Favorite line or dialogue:

John Robie: "Say something nice to her, Danielle."
Danielle Foussard: "She looks a lot older up close."
Frances Stevens: "To a mere child, anything over twenty might seem old."