Tag: 1970s

Take 3: Fist of Fury Review

On By 18cinemalaneLeave a comment

Years ago, on 18 Cinema Lane, I admitted I had never seen any of Bruce Lee’s films. Since admitting that, I wanted to find the perfect opportunity to review a movie from his filmography. Now, I finally received that opportunity because of one man. In one of his interviews, Stefan “Princ” Zdravković said he watched Bruce Lee’s films when he was a kid. Ever since I saw that interview, I made a promise to review one of Bruce’s movies on Princ’s birthday. When I discovered Princ’s birthday was on September 29th, I knew I found a chance to fulfill that promise. Therefore, for this review, I have selected 1972’s Fist of Fury! Martial arts films are rarely covered on 18 Cinema Lane. Despite this, the ones I’ve seen (and reviewed) have been enjoyable. So, will I find Fist of Fury enjoyable as well? Read my review to find out!

Fist of Fury poster created by Golden Harvest Company, Nova Media, and Legend Films

Things I liked about the film:

The acting: Bruce Lee has earned a good reputation for his mastery of marital arts skills. However, based on my experience watching Fist of Fury, I believe Bruce is a stronger actor than most people give him credit for. A scene taking place after Huo Yuanjia’s funeral is the perfect example. Bruce’s character, Chen, is devastated by the loss of his martial arts teacher. He sits in silence and bears a serene yet sad look on his face as he tries to shut out the world around him. But as soon as his peers bring up how Huo Yuanjia died of pneumonia, Chen snaps into anger, shouting in denial with a fierce look in his eyes. This quick transition of emotions was flawless, making Bruce’s performance memorable! Another strong acting performance in Fist of Fury came from Ping-Ou Wei. Portraying an interpreter for a Japanese martial arts school named Wu, Ping-Ou effectively showcased a character that was smarmy and dislikable. This was achieved through vocal inflections, expressive eyes, and even tilts of the head. I actually looked forward to seeing Ping-Ou’s performance because it was that good!

Martial arts choreography: When I choose to watch a martial arts film, especially one starring Bruce Lee, I expect to see scenes featuring really good martial arts choreography. I can honestly say the choreography in Fist of Fury is excellent! All the execution of the movements are sharp and precise. Each duel looked like an intricate and calculated dance, with every opponent delivering strength and agility. Even the incorporation of swords and nunchucks showed how opponents use strategy to gain the upper hand. It also helps how each duel Chen battled in increased in intensity, building up to the movie’s climax. With everything I said, all the martial arts scenes maintained the excitement within the story!

Clever writing: Toward the beginning of Fist of Fury, Wu and two students from a Japanese martial arts school deliver a hand-written threat to Chen and his peers at the Chinese martial arts school. One of the students who accompanied Wu says if Chen defeats the Japanese martial arts school students, he’ll eat his words. Later in the film, when Chen goes to the Japanese martial arts school, he does defeat every student there. He then rips up the hand-written threat his school received earlier and forces two of the Japanese martial arts school students to, literally, eat their words. This is just one example of how some of the writing in Fist of Fury was clever!

Higher stakes: As I mentioned earlier in this review, Chen’s martial arts teacher, Huo Yuanjia, passed away. But Chen believes foul play was involved. Throughout the story, he vows to find the truth about what happened to his teacher. Meanwhile, a Japanese martial arts school wants to assert their dominance over the Chinese martial arts school. They go so far as to destroy property and threaten to close the Chinese martial arts school down. These parts of the story created higher stakes, giving the audience a reason to care about Chen and his wellbeing, as well as that of his peers. The higher stakes in Fist of Fury also brought suspense and intrigue to the overall presentation!

Birthday party set-up image created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/food”>Food photo created by freepik – http://www.freepik.com</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

What I didn’t like about the film:

The sporadic incorporation of the mystery: Like I brought up in my point about Fist of Fury’s higher stakes, Chen vows to find the truth about what happened to his teacher, as he believes foul play was involved. This mystery was one of the most intriguing parts of the story. But, unfortunately, it was sporadically incorporated into the movie. That creative decision led the mystery’s reveal to be somewhat underwhelming. It also made the mystery itself seem, at times, forgotten about. I wish the mystery had a more consistent presence in Fist of Fury.

The audio: I recognize technology in the 1970s was very different from the technology of today. However, a major flaw of Fist of Fury I couldn’t ignore was the audio. I had to turn up my television’s volume because it was difficult to understand what the characters were saying. They, sometimes, sounded muffled, almost like lines were recorded in a library and added in during the film’s post-production phase. Since this is my first time watching any of Bruce Lee’s films, I don’t know if the audio has been an issue in his other movies?

Introducing a character toward the end of the film: Petrov is a Russian martial artist who is friends with the administration at the Japanese martial arts school. Portrayed by Robert Baker, Petrov also performed impressive feats, like bending metal. Even though Petrov was an interesting character, I didn’t like how he was introduced toward the end of the film. This creative decision prevented him from making a bigger impact on the story. In my opinion, if Petrov had been written out of Fist of Fury, it wouldn’t have made much difference.

Martial arts image created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/red”>Red vector created by freepik – http://www.freepik.com</a>. Image found at freepik.com. 

My overall impression:

Like I said in this review’s introduction, I admitted I had never seen any of Bruce Lee’s films. So, for an introduction, I’d say Fist of Fury is a good one! Yes, the martial arts choreography was impressive. But what I also liked about the 1972 movie was how engaging the story itself was. While I wish the mystery had a more consistent presence in the script, it did provide the film with intrigue and suspense. The mystery also provided the characters with higher stakes to deal with. I not only thought some of the writing was clever, I also liked the acting performances, especially Bruce’s portrayal of Chen. In fact, Bruce’s performance made watching Fist of Fury a memorable and enjoyable experience! For me, 2025 has become a year where I’ve gone out of my way to check out movies I’ve been meaning to see. So, with that said, I’m glad I finally got to see at least one of Bruce Lee’s films!

Overall score: 7.7 out of 10

Have you seen Fist of Fury? Would you like to see more of Bruce Lee’s films reviewed on 18 Cinema Lane? Let me know in the comment section!

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

Take 3: Play Misty for Me Review

On By 18cinemalane2 Comments

August’s theme for Genre Grandeur is “Eastwood connected Movies (Clint or his progeny in any capacity)”. As soon I discovered this month’s selected theme, I immediately knew which movie I would choose! For years, I wanted to check out the 1971 film, Play Misty for Me. This is because I had heard Play Misty for Me is the precursor to Fatal Attraction. Since I have seen the 1987 movie, I was curious to see how many similarities or differences Play Misty for Me and Fatal Attraction shared. With this month’s Genre Grandeur theme, I am finally getting that chance! By writing about Play Misty for Me, this is the first time I’m reviewing any of Clint Eastwood’s movies on 18 Cinema Lane. I am familiar with Clint as an actor, so I knew the types of roles he’s typically known for. Therefore, choosing to review Play Misty for Me as the first film of Clint’s covered on my blog is interesting, as it’s quite different from the westerns and action pictures he has usually starred in.

Play Misty for Me poster created by Universal Pictures, Jennings Lang, and The Malpaso Company

Things I liked about the film:

The acting: While I liked the acting as a whole in Play Misty for Me, I have to highlight Clint Eastwood’s and Jessica Walter’s performance. This is because their characters were given the most screen time. Throughout his film career, Clint has gained a reputation for portraying tough, unbreakable heroes. That reputation has been a result of starring in films from the western genre and in titles like Sudden Impact. But in Play Misty for Me, Clint’s character, Dave, adopted a very different persona. The radio disc jockey carries a suave personality with a hint of gentleness. In a great example when Jessica’s character, Evelyn, is restocking Dave’s refrigerator in preparation for dinner, Dave explains to Evelyn how he already has dinner plans. His explanation, however, is calm, which puts Evelyn at ease. Dave’s kind tone of voice, the understanding look in his eyes, and even the relaxed look on his face shows how he isn’t mad at Evelyn. Clint’s versatile acting abilities effectively portray how easy it is to fall in love with Dave!

As I just mentioned in this review, Jessica Walter portrays Evelyn. What I liked about her performance was her ability to seamlessly adopt different emotions. One perfect example is when Evelyn and Dave are having a conversation outside. Before Evelyn leaves Dave’s house, her attitude is friendly. A smile is painted on her face and her personality seems bubbly. But when a neighbor comes outside to complain about the noise, Evelyn immediately becomes very angry. She yells at the neighbor and her entire demeanor is tense. As soon as the neighbor leaves, Evelyn goes back to being friendly like nothing unusual had taken place. Jessica’s ability to seamlessly adopt different emotions was consistent throughout Play Misty for Me. This acting strength made Evelyn an unpredictable character.

The scenery: The biggest pleasant surprise in Play Misty for Me was the scenery! Filmed in Monterey and Carmel, California, the 1971 film features a lot of scenes showcasing the ocean and its surrounding landscape. A perfect example of how photogenic the scenery is can be seen when Dave and Tobie are on a date. One shot proudly displays the ocean at sunset. An orange and yellow sky is met with calm waters shimmering in blue, periwinkle, and lavender. In the foreground, a nearby tree, the edge of a cliff, and the characters’ silhouettes are shadowed, which are contrasted against the lighter colors of the sea. To me, this was one of the most beautiful shots in Play Misty for Me!

The incorporation of jazz music: In movies classified as “psychological thrillers”, the soundtrack primarily consists of suspenseful orchestral music to increase the suspense within that story. The creative team behind Play Misty for Me decided to take a different approach. Jazz tunes provide the main musical sound in the 1971 movie. This is not only because Dave works at a jazz radio station, he also attends a jazz concert. The sounds of this particular music genre invoke a sense of maturity and sophistication. That sophistication and maturity were woven into Play Misty for Me, which allowed the story to be taken seriously. Jazz music also pairs nicely with the oceanic scenery I talked about earlier in this review. The rhythmic movements of the waves and the steady notes of the music create a visual and auditory paradise!

String of musical notes image created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/pentagram-vector_710290.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a> <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/background”>Background vector created by Freepik</a>. Image found at freepik.com. 

What I didn’t like about the film:

A more annoying antagonist: Alex, from Fatal Attraction, is one of the scariest antagonistic characters in film history. While she is emotionally unstable, her attempts to infiltrate Dan’s life are calculated and intentional. A classic example is when Dan discovers the fate of his daughter’s pet rabbit. When I watched Play Misty for Me, Evelyn came across as more annoying than scary. That’s because her efforts to infiltrate Dave’s life are sporadic, whiny, and desperate. These factors caused me to not take Evelyn as seriously as Alex when it comes to being an antagonist.

Inconsistent suspense: Like I said in this review’s introduction, I have heard Play Misty for Me is the precursor to Fatal Attraction. Though it’s been years since I’ve seen the 1987 movie, I remember the story’s suspense being consistent. With all that said, I believed the suspense in Play Misty for Me would be consistent as well. Unfortunately, I was proven wrong. The suspense of Play Misty for Me was sparingly incorporated, only appearing in certain moments of the story. Most of the film features mundane moments with low energy, such as Tobie and Dave’s date, which lasts for about five minutes. That creative decision caused Play Misty for Me to lack a strong amount of adrenaline and intrigue.

A drawn-out film: According to IMDB, Play Misty for Me has a run-time of an hour and forty-two minutes. To me, though, the film felt longer than its run-time. This feeling was the result of some scenes being drawn out longer than necessary. Earlier in this review, I mentioned Dave attending a jazz concert. The scene featuring the concert lasted approximately five minutes. I mentioned Tobie and Dave’s date lasting about five minutes as well. Had these scenes been trimmed down to maybe three minutes or less, more time could have been spent providing Play Misty for Me with more suspenseful moments.

Recording studio image created by Senivpetro at freepik.com. Music photo created by senivpetro – www.freepik.com

My overall impression:

In my review’s introduction, I said I heard Play Misty for Me is the precursor to Fatal Attraction. Now that I’ve seen both movies, I can honestly say I’d prefer Fatal Attraction over Play Misty for Me. From what I remember of the 1987 film, the story’s suspense is consistent. Plus, Alex is a much scarier antagonist than Evelyn. Play Misty for Me contains flaws like inconsistent suspense and the film itself being drawn out. However, the 1971 movie does have its merits. I liked the acting performances, especially those from Clint Eastwood and Jessica Walter. The scenery was the biggest pleasant surprise of the film. Incorporating jazz music was an interesting approach to the psychological thriller genre, giving the story a sense of maturity and sophistication. With everything I’ve been saying, Play Misty for Me is, in my opinion, just ok.

Overall score: 6 out of 10

Have you seen Play Misty for Me? Are there any projects from Clint Eastwood’s or Jessica Walter’s IMDB filmography you’d like to see me cover on 18 Cinema Lane? Let me know in the comment section!

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

Take 3: From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler (1973) Review

On By 18cinemalane14 Comments

All the way back in 2019, I reviewed the 1995 adaptation of From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler. After I shared my thoughts on the film, Gill, from Realweegiemidget Reviews, recommended the 1973 adaptation, which is sometimes titled The Hideaways. Whenever Virginie, from The Wonderful World of Cinema, has hosted the Ingrid Bergman Blogathon, I have wanted to check out the 1973 adaptation, due to Ingrid Bergman starring in the film. Now, for the 110 Years of Ingrid Bergman Blogathon, I finally received the opportunity to write about the movie! While I still haven’t read the book, I am familiar with the story because I covered the 1995 adaptation on 18 Cinema Lane. Back in 2019, I said the film was just ok, as one of my biggest criticisms was the underutilization of Lauren Bacall’s acting talents. Will I give similar criticisms to the 1973 adaptation of From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler? To solve this mystery, keep reading my review!

From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler (1973) poster created by Cinema 5, Westfall Productions, and Cinema 5 Distributing

Things I liked about the film:

Sally Prager’s and Johnny Doran’s acting performance: Starring in From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler as the protagonists, Claudia and Jamie Kincaid, Sally Prager and Johnny Doran carry about 95% of the film. Because of how strong their performances were, they successfully carried the movie by presenting their characters believably! One example takes place toward the beginning of the film. Jamie is telling his sister, Claudia, about a movie he had recently seen. As he talks about the movie, his speech becomes increasingly animated. Even after Claudia kicks him out of her room, Jamie talks even louder, his excitement never faltering. After Jamie and Claudia arrive in New York City, they go to the Metropolitan Museum of Art. When Jamie asks her why she wants to go to the museum, Claudia enthusiastically describes the museum as a castle like the tales of King Arthur. This scene perfectly showcases how Sally effectively portrayed Claudia as precocious; containing enough self-awareness to know exactly what she wants, yet displaying that sense of wonder one would expect from a child her age.

The cinematography: When I reviewed the 1995 adaptation of From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler, I complimented the film’s cinematography. That adaptation’s creative team made some interesting choices when presenting certain scenes, like using close-ups to present the museum’s artifacts. The 1973 adaptation of From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler features good cinematography as well! Similar to the 1995 adaptation, some scenes were shown from Claudia and Jamie’s perspective. While hiding on the school bus, Jamie constantly peeks from behind the seat to see if the bus driver has spotted them. A few shots look like they’re from Jamie’s point of view, with the camera peering around the seat to catch a glimpse of the bus driver. When Jamie and Claudia are at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, they look over the railing at the museum’s employees and security guards in the lobby. Once again, the scene is presented from the point of view of the children. The camera peers over the museum’s railing, looking down at the security guards and employees. Shots like the ones I described make the audience feel like they’re with the characters, creating the illusion of immersion.

The dialogue: A pleasant surprise in 1973’s From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler was the dialogue! Some lines were so well-written, they became a memorable part of the movie. In one scene, as Jamie navigates through the museum, a janitor asks him where he came from. Speaking confidently in a matter-of-fact way, Jamie tells the janitor, “My mother said I came from Heaven”. I not only found this response a clever comeback, it was also a creative way to answer the question. Another scene shows Jamie sharing with Claudia one of the reasons why he ran away with her. While spending a night in the museum, Jamie tells his sister how concerned he was by the thought of her traveling alone, as he believed she would be afraid. Claudia responds to her brother’s belief by saying, “Being self-sufficient doesn’t automatically make a person brave”. This quote showcases an eloquent way of addressing how anyone at any age can be afraid of something.

Angelic statue image created by Marcelo Gerpe at freeimages.com. “FreeImages.com/Marcelo Gerpe.”

What I didn’t like about the film:

Telling instead of showing: In both adaptations of From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler, Jamie and Claudia go to Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler’s house, searching for an angel statue’s legitimacy. From what I remember of the 1995 movie, a scene shows Claudia and Jamie looking for answers about the statue by rummaging through Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler’s mixed-up files. The 1973 version, on the other hand, has Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler telling the answer of the mystery instead of showing the children putting the mystery’s pieces together. Because the creative team behind the 1973 adaptation chose telling over showing, some of the excitement of seeing the protagonists achieve their goal was taken away.

Less emphasis on the mystery: An overarching part of From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler’s story is the mystery surrounding an angelic statue. However, this mystery received less emphasis in both the 1973 and 1995 adaptations. Specifically speaking about the 1973 version, the story focused more on Claudia and Jamie’s adventures in New York City. In fact, the angel statue doesn’t make an appearance until 44 minutes in an hour and forty-five-minute film. Like I said in my review of the 1995 version, this creative decision took a lot of intrigue out of the film, causing the story not to be as engaging or interactive.

The underutilization of Ingrid Bergman: During this review’s introduction, I brought up one of my biggest criticisms of 1995’s From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler; the underutilization of Lauren Bacall’s acting talents. Sadly, I have the same criticism for the 1973 version. Just like the 1995 adaptation, Ingrid Bergman is the top-billed actor in the adaptation from 1973. Yet she doesn’t appear in the story until an hour and fourteen minutes in an hour and forty-five-minute movie. I recognize the 1973 version of From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler premiered toward the end of Ingrid’s career. I also acknowledge the story prioritizes the adventures of Claudia and Jamie Kincaid. But as I said about Lauren Bacall in my review of the 1995 movie, this underutilization not only does Ingrid’s acting talents a disservice, it also comes across as misleading.

110 Years of Ingrid Bergman Blogathon banner created by Virginie, from The Wonderful World of Cinema

My overall impression:

For the 5th Annual Gold Sally Awards, I introduced the Nosferatu vs. Dracula Award. This award is given to two movies that feel like you’re watching the same one. Looking back on my experience watching the 1973 adaptation of From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler and reflecting on my review of the 1995 adaptation, the Nosferatu vs. Dracula Award will likely be brought back for 2026’s edition of the Gold Sally Awards. The 1973 movie shares a lot of the same strengths and flaws as the 1995 version. These similarities made me feel like I was watching the same film twice. I knew what to expect from the story, due to seeing From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler from 1995. However, I still wish both adaptations contained stronger differentiations between them. The films I’ve seen of Ingrid Bergman’s from the 1970s have, in my opinion, been underwhelming. While I found A Walk in the Spring Rain a flavorless picture, I think A Matter of Time and now From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler are just ok.

Overall score: 6 out of 10

Have you seen 1973’s From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler? Which book adaptation do you wish starred a “classic” film star? Tell me in the comment section!

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

Take 3: A Little Romance (1979) Review

On By 18cinemalane9 Comments

Back in 2022, I wrote a list of the top ten movies I’d love to review. One of the films on that list was 1979’s A Little Romance. Since publishing that article three years ago, I haven’t gotten around to reviewing the movie. But Gill’s (from Realweegiemidget Reviews) and Barry’s (from Cinematic Catharsis) blogathon, Adventure-A-Thon, finally gave me an opportunity to check A Little Romance out! When it comes to “adventure” in cinema, that term can have different meanings depending on who you ask. For me, an “adventure” movie is when the story’s characters go on a journey to achieve something. In the case of A Little Romance, the protagonists, Daniel and Lauren, travel to Italy to prove the legitimacy of a legend. The 1979 film is not the only picture I’ve reviewed this year involving Italian travel. I wrote about Roman Holiday back in January. In my opinion, the movie was just ok, as I wanted to like it more than I did. Was A Little Romance ok like Roman Holiday? Let’s start the adventure of this review!

A Little Romance (1979) poster created by Orion Pictures, Pan Arts, Trinacra Films, and Warner Bros.

Things I liked about the film:

The acting: When it comes to teenagers in movies, it can be easy for a creative team to present those characters stereotypically. If written or directed to adopt certain behaviors and attitudes, teenage characters could even come across as caricatures. Fortunately, this was not the case in A Little Romance! Though there are only four teenage characters in the movie, their interactions didn’t feel scripted, making the characters themselves seem realistic. One example shows Lauren (portrayed by Diane Lane) and her friend, Natalie (portrayed by Ashby Semple), looking at sculptures during a class trip. As they observe the sculptures, Lauren nonchalantly tells tall tales about her time spent with Daniel. Natalie naively believes Lauren, her eyes becoming wide and her tone of voice revealing how shocked she is. Lauren, with a casual smile on her face and a giggle in her voice, then shares with Natalie how her tall tales were fabricated. This exchange between the two friends illustrates how teenagers can sometimes tease and joke with each other.

In this review’s introduction, I mentioned how the protagonists, Daniel and Lauren, travel to Italy to prove the legitimacy of a legend. Their journey was enjoyable to watch because of how strong Diane Lane and Thelonious Bernard’s on-screen chemistry was! Every time Lauren and Daniel interacted with one another, they always looked like they got along so well. There was a sweetness to their relationship that was wholesome and charming. It also helps how both Daniel and Lauren had likable personalities that complimented each other. While Thelonious and Diane deserve credit for their performances, credit should also be given to the screenwriting.

An appreciation for film: Before watching A Little Romance, I knew what the basic premise was about. But when I finally saw the 1979 picture, I was pleasantly surprised by the appreciation for film woven into the script! As soon as the movie starts, the audience sees Daniel watching a collection of films in a local cinema. As the story progresses, he sometimes quotes the movies he sees and even wants Lauren to call him “Boggie”, as he believes Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall were meant to be together. Daniel’s decisions and perspectives are also influenced by the world of film. When Daniel receives rude comments about his relationship with Lauren from a movie director named George de Marco, Daniel punches George. Not only does Daniel strongly dislike George’s films, Daniel believes George’s comments cheapen the meaning of love he’s learned from movies.

The dialogue: In some of the movies I’ve reviewed this year, one of the strengths was the dialogue. The way it was written and delivered allowed this film-making component to be memorable for the right reasons. The dialogue was also a strength in A Little Romance! Through the screenwriting, the audience can tell how much thought was put into this aspect of the 1979 production. While Lauren talks about her family, Daniel asks her why she calls her stepfather ‘Richard’. Lauren replies by saying “It’s easier to lose a Richard than a dad”. From that one quote, Lauren is able to express how her mother’s multiple marriages have affected the family dynamic. In order to make enough money for their trip to Italy, Daniel and Lauren plan to bet on race horses. They want to figure out the betting odds to increase their chances of choosing a winning horse. When Lauren suggests using a computer to get these numbers, Daniel says “I am not a computer”. This simple quote stresses how humans, as well as betting odds, don’t always provide the correct answers.

The Adventure-A-Thon banner created by Gill from Realweegiemidget Reviews and Barry from Cinematic Catharsis

What I didn’t like about the film:

The adventure’s prolonged delay: Like I said in this introduction, Daniel and Lauren travel to Italy to prove the legitimacy of a legend. But their Italian journey doesn’t begin until a little over an hour into an hour and fifty-minute story. That’s because the first half of the movie is devoted to setting up the motives for the journey and building up to the trip itself. It’s important for any creative team to set up their movie’s premise and provide build up to significant parts of the presentation. For A Little Romance, however, that set up/build up took a little too long.

Lack of subtitles: About half of A Little Romance takes place in France. This means some scenes feature characters speaking in French to one another. But when the story presented French dialogue, subtitles did not appear on screen. For viewers who are not fluent in French, they may feel like the creative team is withholding context from them. Even though clues such as body language can help the audience assume what is happening in the story, I still wish subtitles had been included in A Little Romance.

An absence of Daniel’s father: At the beginning of A Little Romance, the audience is introduced to Daniel and his father, Michel. According to Daniel, Michel is a taxi driver who watches horse races from time to time. Throughout the movie, however, Michel’s appearances are so far and few between, I almost forgot he was in the movie. Meanwhile, Lauren’s parents, Richard and Kay, are consistently involved in the story. I recognize A Little Romance revolves around Daniel and Lauren’s relationship and adventure. But I still think Michel should have received a larger role in the film. Perhaps his involvement in the story could have related to one of the movie’s central themes.

Colorful travel suitcase image created by Pikisuperstar at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/beautiful-illustration-of-travel_2686674.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/watercolor”>Watercolor vector created by Pikisuperstar – Freepik.com</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

My overall impression:

When I first brought up A Little Romance in 2022, I said the story seemed like a light-hearted version of Rich Kids. While there is some truth to this statement, my initial claim now seems a bit too simplistic. Both Rich Kids and A Little Romance revolve around adolescent characters relying on themselves and each other to navigate the world around them. But unlike Rich Kids, there’s a hopeful optimism in A Little Romance! Because the story emphasizes Daniel and Lauren’s Italian journey, the audience witnesses Lauren and Daniel’s relationship grow throughout the story. The acting performances and screenwriting allow these characters to share meaningful and heart-felt moments together. Strong messages and themes are sprinkled into the script, from the importance of being your authentic self to having the courage to achieve dreams. Though it took a little over an hour for the journey to begin, A Little Romance is a delightful, pleasant film! A significant point the film makes is how adventure can come in different forms. The 1979 picture can also cause viewers to think about what it truly means to be a “legend”.

Overall score: 7.3 out of 10

Have you seen A Little Romance? What does the term “adventure movie” mean to you? Let me know in the comment section!

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

Take 3: Orca (1977) Review

On By 18cinemalane12 Comments

When I participated in the first ‘Favorite Stars in B movies’ Blogathon two years ago, I reviewed the 1963 film, The Raven. I found Vincent Price’s picture to be a fine, likable one, which left me amazed how a simple story from Edgar Allan Poe could be turned into a feature presentation. For this year’s Third ‘Favorite Stars in B movies’ Blogathon, there were plenty of movies from Vincent Price’s filmography for me to choose from. But this time, I decided to go in a different direction. As I looked back at the history of my blog, I came to realize none of Richard Harris’ films have been covered on 18 Cinema Lane. I also remembered how the 1977 movie, Orca, was recommended to me by Eric Binford (from Diary of a Movie Maniac). With these two facts in mind, I found the perfect title to write about for the Third ‘Favorite Stars in B movies’ Blogathon! When Eric suggested Orca to me, he said the film steals from Jaws. Because I’ve seen the 1975 blockbuster, I imagined Orca to be a knock-off/rip-off of the iconic movie. But is the 1977 picture a copy of Jaws? Let’s dive into this review and find out!

Orca (1977) poster created by Famous Films (II), Dino De Laurentiis, and Paramount Pictures

Things I liked about the film:

Richard Harris’ performance: Because Richard Harris is one of the reasons why I chose to review Orca, I will now take the time to highlight his performance. In the 1977 movie, Richard portrays Captain Nolan, a fisherman who desires catching a whale in order to receive a large sum of money. His versatile acting abilities helped create a multi-layered character, one that is both tragic and complicated. After killing a pregnant whale, Nolan is very remorseful of his actions. One evening, he confides with Rachel Bedford (portrayed by Charlotte Rampling) over how he’d apologize to the dead whale’s mate. During this confession, Nolan adopts a somber look on his face, his eyes on the verge of tears. He even boasts a long frown. Nolan’s tone of voice is serious, sounding like he’s pleading for forgiveness. This one exchange presents a perfect example of Richard using his acting talents to bring his character to life!

An introduction to Orca Whales: Toward the beginning of the movie, Rachel Bedford lectures a group of students (and the film’s audience) about Orca Whales. This lecture is packed with information, from an explanation of the word ‘orca’ in Latin to showing a picture of an Orca fetus. On Captain Nolan’s boat, Annie (portrayed by Bo Derek) shares with Nolan how Orca Whales stay with their mate for life. He even receives a book from Rachel about whales in mythology. While some of the movie’s information may be dated (due to what’s been discovered about Orcas since the film’s release), it does provide an introduction to Orca Whales. Including this information into the script feels like the creative team made an effort to educate their audience.

Tonal variety in music: One of the most iconic pieces of music in film history is the theme from Jaws. John Williams’ score and the image of the titular shark sneaking up on its victims created a perfect, memorable combination. But compared to Orca, this piece of music seems to sensationalize the shark itself, as the suspenseful tune is the only music heard whenever the shark comes around. The first shot of the 1977 picture shows a group of Orcas swimming in their natural habitat. Peaceful, orchestral music plays in the background anytime whales are, simply, gliding from place to place. The only time suspenseful music is heard is when the titular Orca is causing chaos and destruction. This creative choice emphasizes how the whale has been provoked. Tones between different pieces of music show that while Orca Whales can have dangerous behavior, they can also be a great source of fascination.

The Third ‘Favorite Stars in B movies’ Blogathon banner created by Brian from Filmsfrombeyond.com

What I didn’t like about the film:

Inconsistent voice-overs: In Orca, Rachel narrates what is happening in the story. I actually liked this creative decision, especially since she was one of the most educated characters when it came to Orca Whales. What I didn’t like was how Rachel’s voice-overs were inconsistent. In fact, she only narrated about three times throughout the one hour and thirty-two-minute film. Had these voice-overs been more consistent, they could have been used as a bridge between scenes.

The underutilization of Will Sampson: Another reason why I wanted to review Orca is Will Sampson’s involvement in the project. After seeing One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest and The White Buffalo, I was looking forward to watching another movie from Will’s filmography. When I finally checked out Orca, I was disappointed by how Will’s acting talents were underutilized. Not only did he appear in the film for a limited amount of time, he also received very few lines in the script. I, honestly, wish Will’s character, Jacob, had played a larger in the story, especially since he shared great insight about Orca Whales.

Limited character development: The story of Orca primarily revolves around the battle between the titular whale and Nolan. Because of this creative decision, Nolan becomes the only (human) character to receive character development. Other characters are simply known by their profession or an experienced scenario. Rachel is characterized as the scientist who is educated about Orca Whales. Annie is known as the lady who broke her leg. I understand there is only so much story to tell in one hour and thirty-two-minutes. However, I still believe a little more character development should have been included in the script.

Orca Whale image created by Freepik at freepik.com. Label vector created by freepik – www.freepik.com. Image found at freepik.com.

My overall impression:

In the introduction of my review, I said I imagined Orca to be a knock-off/rip-off of Jaws. But now I have seen the 1977 picture, calling it that does the film a disservice. I never got the impression Orca’s creative team was intentionally trying to copy the 1975 blockbuster. Instead, the film serves as a cautionary tale of how one’s actions toward animals and their natural environment have consequences. As I said in my review, including information about Orca Whales into the script feels like the creative team made an effort to educate their audience. This is different from Jaws, where (as far as I remember) education about sharks was far and few between. With that said, I wonder what would have happened if Orca had received anywhere near as much attention as Jaws? On the one hand, society’s perspective and treatment of Orca Whales may have changed much sooner. More knowledge and awareness may have already been reached before the 21st century. But, seeing how much merchandising and commercialism Jaws has produced in a fifty-year timespan, maybe Orca’s intended message would have gotten lost among the shuffle.

Overall score: 6 out of 10

Have you seen Orca? What are some of your favorite films with animals in title roles? Let me know in the comment section!

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

Comparing with the Critics – Worst of 1976 – Gable and Lombard

On By 18cinemalane7 Comments

This review is from my series, Comparing with the Critics. If you’d like to learn more about the series, click on the link below.

Introducing my new series, Comparing with the Critics!

In the ‘Best Films of 1976’ episode of Opening Soon…at a Theater Near You, Gene Siskel stated “1976 was a pretty lousy year for movies”. He emphasized that statement by saying “the year was littered with dogs”. Since I haven’t seen a lot of movies from 1976, I can’t agree or disagree with Siskel’s claim. But what I can do is talk about one of Siskel’s choices for worst movies of 1976. As I said in my 1976 introduction of Comparing with the Critics, one episode was primarily focused on discussing the best movies from a given year. This left Siskel and Ebert with only a few minutes to talk about some of the year’s worst films. Despite the 1976 episode’s limited selection of “bad” movies, I chose Gable and Lombard for this edition of Comparing with the Critics Worst of review. What made Gable and Lombard the most interesting title from the episode’s collection of “bad” movies was the story’s emphasis on Clark Gable and Carole Lombard’s relationship. I am somewhat familiar with Clark and Carole, as I have reviewed at least one of their movies on 18 Cinema Lane. Because I hadn’t heard of Gable and Lombard until I saw the ‘Best Films of 1976’ episode of Opening Soon…at a Theater Near You, I viewed the film as a way to expand my cinematic horizons and learn more about Carole and Clark. Now that I have seen the movie for myself, I believe Siskel’s, and even Roger Ebert’s, thoughts on the film were a tad harsh.

Gable and Lombard poster created by Universal Pictures

Before revealing his choices for the worst movies of 1976, Siskel says the year featured “two kinds of cinematic canines: cheap, lousy pictures and expensive, lousy pictures”. Based on what films he chose, Gable and Lombard was placed in the latter category. According to Wikipedia, the film’s budget was $4.5 million. It appears most of the budget was spent on Gable and Lombard’s set design. One scene took place outside, with the guests at a ball wearing white. Small candles surrounded the pool’s perimeter. In the pool were small islands of white flowers and candles, along with swans peacefully gliding through the water. Overall, this part of the set was absolutely gorgeous! Throughout Gable and Lombard, some scenes took place in Clark or Carole’s dressing room. These dressing rooms looked more like condominiums; distinct spaces that appear livable. Carole’s dressing room boasted a color combination of yellow and white. Featuring design choices like a white dining room set gave the dressing room a feminine style. Meanwhile, dark wood surrounded the fireplace in Clark’s dressing room. There was even a pool table located near the fireplace. These design choices created a more masculine space. Carole and Clark’s dressing rooms provided a good visual representation of how different they were despite having a similar career path.

In Name Only poster created by RKO Radio Pictures. Image found at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:In_Name_Only.jpg

While Roger Ebert never shared his thoughts on Gable and Lombard in the ‘Best Films of 1976’ episode, he did write a review for the movie, which can be found on rogerebert.com. In his review, Ebert states “Brolin does, indeed, look a lot like Gable – but imitation here has nothing to do with flattery”. While I agree with Ebert’s opinion on James Brolin’s appearance in the movie, I disagree with the rest of Ebert’s statement. Not only did James look like Clark, he even sounded like him too! It almost felt like James transformed into another person. During Gable and Lombard, James consistently carried an easy-going attitude. This choice in acting and directing showcased Clark’s down-to-earth personality. Meanwhile, Carole was a comedic, life of the party. Portrayed by Jill Clayburgh, Carole’s up-beat personality made her one of the most popular actresses of her time. But behind closed doors, Carole had her doubts and insecurities. In one scene, Carole is sharing with Clark how she feels undeserving of a recent achievement. Her eyes reveal a sense of worry. Concern, even sadness, can be heard in her voice. During her conversation with Clark, Carole looks and sounds truly discouraged. Clark, with a warm smile and calming tone of voice, reassures Carole what’s most important is surrounding herself with people who support her. Jill’s and James’ performance is one of the reasons why this scene is one of my favorites in Gable and Lombard!

China Seas poster created by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer.

Sidney J. Furie, the director of Gable and Lombard, chose to make “a movie about just folks”, primarily focusing on the personal lives of Clark Gable and Carole Lombard. While Ebert says this decision gave “the movie a certain originality”, he also criticizes Sidney’s choice, claiming that “by limiting itself to this aspect of their lives the movie never deals with the reasons we find them interesting in the first place”. As I said in this review’s introduction, I am somewhat familiar with Clark and Carole. Because I don’t know which parts of Gable and Lombard are factual or creative liberty, I took the story of Carole and Clark’s relationship with a grain of salt. From the way Louis B. Mayer (portrayed by Allen Garfield) talked to Clark about groups of people demanding certain elements of films be changed due to “indecency”, I knew he was talking about the Breen Code, a series of morality related guidelines enforced in Hollywood from 1934 to 1954. Therefore, I saw Gable and Lombard as a character study of how a portion of the Breen Code era affected the professional and personal lives of the Hollywood landscape, with Carole and Clark serving as just two examples. When Clark is accused of having an affair with a waitress, Carole volunteers to testify in court. Everyone from her inner circle knows if she testifies, she will expose her and Clark’s relationship as well as end her career. While explaining why he doesn’t want Carole to testify, Louis B. Mayer shares with Clark the ugly truth about what happened to some actresses after their careers ended. This scene is honest about the consequences if the Breen Code was broken. By viewing the film from the lens of the Breen Code, Gable and Lombard’s narrative is not only compelling, it is given higher stakes.

Twentieth Century poster created by Columbia Pictures.

I said earlier in this review how Ebert and Siskel were only given a few minutes to talk about the year’s worst films. This made Siskel’s discussion of Gable and Lombard sound vague, as he states “in real life, you can get arrested for playing around with dead bodies. The same should be true for movie-makers who desecrate the memory of great, dead actors”. Because this review affords me more time to elaborate on my opinion, I will now discuss what I didn’t like about Gable and Lombard. At the beginning of the movie, Clark is told Carole was in a plane crash, but her whereabouts are unknown. The very next scene shows Carole riding in an ambulance, alive and appearing uninjured. That scene took place years before the plane crash happened. With no on-screen text acknowledging the story’s time and place, it was sometimes difficult to figure out the story’s timeline. I liked James’ and Jill’s portrayal of Clark and Carole. However, I found their on-screen chemistry inconsistent. When their story began, Carole and Clark went from enemies to lovers. For the rest of the story, they continuously broke up then got back together. I recognize Gable and Lombard is based on a real-life relationship. But because of the back-and-forth nature of that relationship, I couldn’t stay fully invested in the relationship of Clark and Carole.

Comparing with the Critics banner created by me, Sally Silverscreen. TV show title cards created by WTTW National Productions, WTTW, Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), Lifetime Television, Tribune Entertainment, Buena Vista Television, and Disney-ABC Domestic Television

Looking back on Gable and Lombard, I believe Siskel’s, and even Roger Ebert’s, thoughts on the film were a tad harsh. I wouldn’t call it a “dog” or “lousy”, as the movie does have its merits. But I do believe the marketing is a bit misleading. The quotes on Gable and Lombard’s poster are “It was the wildest, wackiest love affair Hollywood ever knew” and “They had more than love – they had fun”. In the ‘Best Films of 1976’ episode of Opening Soon…at a Theater Near You, Carole dumped salad on Clark’s head, one of the more humorous scenes from the film. While there were comedic moments sprinkled throughout the story, the movie’s marketing presents the false idea it is solely a comedy. Seen from the lens of the Breen Code, Gable and Lombard presents a character study of how a portion of the Breen Code era affected the professional and personal lives of the Hollywood landscape. With the story emphasizing Carole and Clark’s relationship, they navigate complicated decisions, as well as honesty about feelings and emotions. The balance of comedy and tragedy adds a sense of maturity to the overall story. At worst, the movie prioritizes style over substance. as most of the budget seems to be put toward the set design. But, at best, Gable and Lombard is just ok.

This review was brought to you by

Sally Silverscreen

Comparing with the Critics – 1976 – Introduction

On By 18cinemalaneLeave a comment

In the 1970s, when Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert’s show was called Opening Soon…at a Theater Near You and then Sneak Previews, there were no separate episodes for the year’s best and worst movies. Instead, one episode would show Ebert and Siskel devoting most of their time to talking about the best films of a given year. In the last few minutes of that episode, Siskel and Ebert would briefly mention some of their choices for the year’s worst titles. The first episode of any iteration of Ebert and Siskel’s show premiered in late November, 1975. That made 1976 the first year to receive a year-end episode of the best and worst movies. This is an interesting coincidence, as Network became the first movie I reviewed for my Comparing with the Critics series. For worst of 1976, I didn’t have many films to choose from due to the episode’s limited selection. But after seeing which pictures Siskel and Ebert selected, I chose Gable and Lombard as the Worst of 1976. As I already said in this introduction, I reviewed Network. That movie was picked as the Best of 1976.

Comparing with the Critics banner created by me, Sally Silverscreen. TV show title cards created by WTTW National Productions, WTTW, Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), Lifetime Television, Tribune Entertainment, Buena Vista Television, and Disney-ABC Domestic Television

The Top Ten Worst Movies I Saw in 2024

On By 18cinemalaneLeave a comment

While 2024 was, for me, a better year for movies, I still saw some movies I didn’t like. Similar to my worst movies list of 2023, most of the films on this year’s list were disappointing or average. But, unlike 2023, the top four titles are from different genres. The dishonorable mentions section has returned! This time, however, there are more DNFs (did not finish). Like I have said in past lists, my top ten worst movies I saw in 2024 list is not intended to be mean-spirited, negative, or disrespectful. It’s just a list of my own, honest opinion. Since I reviewed some of the movies on my list, I will provide the links to those reviews in this article.

Dishonorable Mentions

The Reluctant Debutante, The Gambler: Luck of the Draw, Jazz Ramsey: A K-9 Mystery, Million Dollar Lethal Listing, CrimeTime: Freefall (I turned it off after about forty minutes), Mermaid Down (I turned off this movie after about twenty minutes), Blood, Sweat and Cheer (I turned it off after about eighteen minutes), and Temptation Under the Sun (I turned off this movie after about twenty-two minutes)

Image by starline on Freepik

10. Crimes of Fashion: Killer Clutch

In the 2020s, Hallmark has come up with story ideas that worked well enough for a stand-alone mystery movie, but unsustainable for a multi-chapter series. One of these ideas came from Crimes of Fashion: Killer Clutch. This film made the same mistake as Mystery Island: not allowing the protagonist to use her skills to solve the case. For Lauren, the main character in Crimes of Fashion: Killer Clutch, her psychology skills were so underutilized, she seemed more like an over glorified intern. Thick French accents making several characters difficult to understand is another major flaw of the film. It prevented me from being fully invested in the story. Crimes of Fashion: Killer Clutch was, in my opinion, a disappointing movie. But compared to the other titles on 2024’s worst of the year list, Hallmark’s production was, simply, ‘underwhelming’.

Take 3: Crimes of Fashion: Killer Clutch Review

9. Boy in the Walls

When I first read the synopsis for Boy in the Walls, I thought the film would be a spookier version of 2016’s Boy in the Attic. Sadly, this was not the case. The 2023 Lifetime presentation contained a mystery that was drawn out for too long. It also doesn’t help how the protagonist made one dumb decision after another. Without spoiling the film, all I’ll say is the title is misleading. If you haven’t watched either referenced movie, I’d recommend Boy in the Attic.

8. The 39 Steps

In my review of The 39 Steps, I said the 1935 picture was the most “meh” title from Alfred Hitchcock’s filmography. This statement was made due to the limited sense of urgency and intrigue within the story. As I also said in my review, The 39 Steps seems longer than an hour and twenty-six minutes. The drawn-out nature of the movie created a slow and boring build-up to a reveal that feels kind of ridiculous and anti-climactic. While romance has been incorporated in some of Alfred’s films, it didn’t work in The 39 Steps. Richard and Pamela’s attraction for one another was too abrupt, welcoming the presence of the “insta-love” trope. Even though The 39 Steps was a disappointing movie, I gave it a lower placement on my list. Comparing the 1935 film to Alfred’s other productions, Hitchcock’s filmography shows how much he improved as a director.

Take 3: The 39 Steps Review

7. Hallmark Hall of Fame’s Pack of Lies

There are some movies that, in my opinion, should have been documentaries instead. The 1987 Hallmark Hall of Fame presentation, Pack of Lies, is just one example. This film in the Hallmark Hall of Fame collection is based on a true story. While “based on a true story” movies can be engaging, intriguing, and even thought-provoking, Pack of Lies was disappointing. Like I said in my review of the 1987 production, the film was a two hour slow and tedious build-up to a resolution that was underwhelming and anti-climactic. The creative team’s decision to choose telling over showing caused other flaws, from little lapse in time to things not making sense. Pack of Lies proves Hallmark Hall of Fame movies are not created equally. However, there are other Hallmark Hall of Fame presentations from the 1980s I like, such as the adaptations of The Secret Garden and A Tale of Two Cities.

Take 3: Hallmark Hall of Fame’s Pack of Lies Review

6. One Bad Apple: A Hannah Swensen Mystery

While A Sprinkle of Deceit: A Hannah Swensen Mystery was slightly better than One Bad Apple: A Hannah Swensen Mystery, I was still disappointed in the latter film. For starters, Victor Webster and Alison Sweeney had no on-screen chemistry. A character (not Hannah) solves the mystery by making an assumption about the case and being conveniently correct. But the worst part about One Bad Apple: A Hannah Swensen Mystery was Delores’ subplot. Up until this film, Delores was very against Hannah getting involved in cases, as well as dating Mike. So, for Delores to become a private investigator and seem to treat her new job as a joke completely went against her character. In fact, this was such a bad creative idea, Delores’ private investigating career was barely mentioned in A Sprinkle of Deceit: A Hannah Swensen Mystery. If there are more Hannah Swensen films in the works, I really hope Delores receives better story ideas.

Hallmark Hall of Fame’s Pack of Lies poster created by Hallmark Hall of Fame Productions, Robert Halmi, and CBS

5. My Life Is on the Line

This Lifetime movie had one of the network’s most creative story ideas. The 2024 picture was about a woman who tried to solve a mystery on her computer at her office cubicle. But the longer I watched this movie, the sooner I realized that aforementioned idea wasn’t sustainable for a feature-length production. Instead, the novelty of how the mystery was solved got old very quickly. My Life Is on the Line is yet another Lifetime film where the protagonist makes a collection of dumb choices. Her decision-making is so bad, other characters in the story, including her boss, call her out for it. Lifetime’s 2024 presentation was, for me, the most disappointing movie of the year.

4. Network

Network holds the honor of not only being the first film I reviewed for my Comparing with the Critics series, it’s also the first film I disagreed with the critics on. Even though Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert placed the movie in their list of the top five films from 1976, I would call Network one of the “Dogs of the Year”. For me, it was more of an endurance test, where the story’s first half was a drawn-out search for a resolution to the movie’s conflict and the second half was a yelling contest. Being a pretentious picture by taking itself too seriously and telling a dry, boring story didn’t work in Network’s favor. There are movies from the 1970s I like. Unfortunately, Network isn’t one of them.

Comparing with the Critics – Best of 1976 – Network

3. Mount Hideaway Mysteries: Exes and Oh No’s

It’s ironic that Mount Hideaway Mysteries: Heartache and Homecoming became the third worst movie of 2023 and now Mount Hideaway Mysteries: Exes and Oh No’s became the third worst movie of 2024. When you look past this irony, you’ll see how Mount Hideaway Mysteries: Exes and Oh No’s shares some of the same flaws as its sequel, like not understanding how technology works. Mount Hideaway Mysteries: Exes and Oh No’s contains its own flaws, with poor special effects as one example. While this movie is so bad, it’s, at times, unintentionally funny, I do acknowledge how challenging it can be to create a cinematic project. In fact, the best way to sum up Mount Hideaway Mysteries: Exes and Oh No’s is the quote, “Mistakes are proof that you are trying”.

Take 3: Mount Hideaway Mysteries: Exes and Oh No’s Review

2. Revenge Best Served Chilled

This Lifetime movie from 2022 had a very misleading title and synopsis. Not only is there no revenge in the story, there’s also nothing being chilled throughout the film. According to a plot summary I read, Revenge Best Served Chilled is about a series of murder mysteries taking place at a wine expert competition, with the protagonist trying to clear her name and solve the mysteries. The movie actually emphasizes the wine expert competition to the point where there is little to no mystery involved. Like Boy in the Walls and My Life Is on The Line, the protagonist, Emily, makes so many dumb decisions. I, honestly, should have turned this movie off after Emily doesn’t lock her family’s restaurant’s front doors as she’s spending the night at the restaurant. But I naively thought Revenge Best Served Chilled was going to be a better movie.

1. Frankenstein (2004)

I referenced this movie while reviewing the Hallmark adaptation of Frankenstein, as I was pointing out a technical error on Wikipedia. When I saw the version of Frankenstein starring Vincent Perez, I immediately knew it was going to be the worst movie I saw in 2024. While this movie contains some interesting ideas, those ideas are bogged down by other ideas. The excessive number of ideas made the story feel like a series of vignettes either loosely connected to each other or not connected at all. What also makes the overall story weak is how nothing is explained. The ending is one of the most “sequel bait” endings I’ve seen in a long time. I would strongly discourage readers from checking out this version of Frankenstein. More time will be spent being frustrated than entertained.

Mount Hideaway Mysteries: Exes and Oh No’s poster created by Glass House Distribution

Have fun in 2025!

Sally Silverscreen

Comparing with the Critics – Best of 1976 – Network

On By 18cinemalane6 Comments

This review is from my series, Comparing with the Critics. If you’d like to learn more about the series, click on the link below.

Introducing my new series, Comparing with the Critics!

There are two reasons why I chose Network for my first review of Comparing with the Critics. The first reason is how the movie is an appropriate title for The 6th Golden Boy Blogathon: A William Holden Celebration, hosted by Virginie and Emily from The Wonderful World of Cinema and The Flapper Dame. Network appearing on Gene Siskel’s and Roger Ebert’s list of the top five films from 1976 is the second reason. When I looked through William Holden’s IMDB filmography in preparation for the blogathon, I remembered how Ebert and Siskel liked Network. In fact, it was one of the few films they agreed on. I was aware of Network prior to the Comparing with the Critics series because I had heard it was adapted into a stage play. Toward the beginning of the ‘Best Films of 1976’ episode, Siskel proclaimed how “1976 was a pretty lousy year for movies”. I can’t speak on the cinematic year of 1976 as a whole. But based on my thoughts on Network, this movie would fit Siskel’s argument about the state of 1976 when it comes to film.

Network poster created by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM) and United Artists


When it’s his turn to talk about Network, Siskel says
“I think she’s gonna win an Oscar for this picture”, referring to Faye Dunaway’s
performance in the film. Siskel got his wish when Faye did win the Best Actress
award at the 49th Academy Awards. While I can’t compare her portrayal
of Diana Christensen to the other performances that were nominated that year, I
can comment on how interesting some of Faye’s interactions were with William
Holden’s character, Max Schumacher. While having dinner one evening, Diana asks
Max a series of questions, in order to learn more about her co-worker. The more
personal the questions become, the more reserved Max appears. This reserved demeanor
is consistently carried by William throughout the movie, using emotion more
subtly. When Max does become more emotional, it happens at certain moments,
such as when he’s recalling a story about his first broadcasting job. Meanwhile,
Diana expresses her emotions more openly. She’s more honest when it comes to
her perspective, believing no subject is off limits. The pairing of Max and Diana,
portrayed by William and Faye, represents the “old school” and “new school”
mentality of the world of broadcast television. It also represents “old” and “new”
Hollywood.

News reporter being filmed image created by Macrovector at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/journalist-reporter-profession-isometric-banner_2875517.htm’>Designed by Macrovector</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/banner”>Banner vector created by Macrovector – Freepik.com</a>, Image found at freepik.com.

Some of Hallmark’s movies have pulled back the curtain on
certain industries. One great example, Cooking with Love, shows a
behind-the-scenes look at how to create a television show. As you’re reading
this editorial, you’re probably wondering what a film such as Cooking with
Love has to do with Network. Similar to the 2018 aforementioned production,
the 1976 film explores the behind-the-scenes operations of network television. Network shows the various steps that are needed
to make network television run as smoothly as possible. The movie also
addresses how television programs are brought to the screen. During a typical
work day, Diana was presented with a set of tv pilots. Hearing the premise of these
pilots makes her realize how similar they all sound. This revelation inspires Diana
to create a program that is drastically different. While talking about Network,
Siskel shares how “I also like movies that deal with what’s really going on in
the world”. Because the movie, more often than not, grounds itself in reality,
the realistic presentation of network television’s behind-the-scenes are
insightful and even educational for the audience.

The 6th Golden Boy Blogathon: A William Holden Celebration banner created by Virginie and Emily from The Wonderful World of Cinema and The Flapper Dame

As I just wrote about in this editorial, Network explores
the behind-the-scenes operations of network television. While I liked this
aspect of the movie, there were times when I felt the movie’s creative team
expected their audience to know what they were talking about. The mention of “shares”
is just one example. The term “shares” was thrown around like confetti on New
Year’s Eve. Diana even dreams about creating a show that will earn a certain number
of shares. Trying to figure out what this part of network television was, I was
confused if the characters were referencing the Stock Market or a program’s
viewership. According to Wikipedia, Network is considered a “satirical
drama”. I could tell when moments were intended to be satire. But, in my
opinion, effective satire is when a story’s creative team knows when to play it
straight and when to acknowledge the joke. Network’s creative team
played it a little too straight, taking their production too seriously. All of
this led to a movie that was pretentious.

Newspaper image created by Zlatko_plamenov at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-psd/newspaper-mockup_1386098.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/mockup”>Mockup psd created by Zlatko_plamenov – Freepik.com</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

In this review’s introduction, I mentioned how Network was one of the few films Ebert and Siskel agreed on. They both stated how comedic Network was. While Ebert called the film “funny”, Siskel said “I laughed a lot at Network”. Comedy, like cinema, is subjective. With that said, the only time I giggled during the film was when Max Schumacher suggests hiring a psychic to report the weather. The story overall was not only dry, it took itself too seriously, as I already mentioned in this review. Network’s first half was a drawn-out search for a resolution to the story’s conflict. The movie’s second half turned into a contest to figure out which character could yell the loudest and angriest. To me, this was a recipe for a headache and not a hilarious two hours. Then again, I don’t find characters yelling and screaming at each other funny.

Comparing with the Critics banner created by me, Sally Silverscreen. TV show title cards created by WTTW National Productions, WTTW, Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), Lifetime Television, Tribune Entertainment, Buena Vista Television, and Disney-ABC Domestic Television


Network was one of the films featured in the ‘Best Films
of 1976’ episode of Opening Soon…at a Theater Near You. As stated in
this review’s introduction, the movie appeared on Gene Siskel’s and Roger Ebert’s
list of the top five films of 1976. If I made a guest appearance on the show, Network
would not be on my top five or even top ten films list of that year. In fact, I’d
consider the movie as one of the “Dogs of the Year”. Network, for me,
was an endurance test that almost made me fall asleep. Taking itself too
seriously by expecting too much from the audience and telling a dry, boring
story didn’t help Network’s case. Though comedy is subjective, I didn’t
find the film very funny. However, there were aspects of the film I liked, such
as the acting and the peek behind network television’s curtain. But, like
network television itself, there are many parts needed to make a movie work. As
I wrap up this review for Comparing with the Critics, I’d like to respond to
the film’s overarching quote; I’m bored as heck, and I wish Network used
its indoor voice.


This review was brought to you by

Sally Silverscreen





The 6th Annual Gold Sally Awards are Here!

On By 18cinemalaneLeave a comment

Since 2024 is a Leap Year, I wasn’t going to miss the opportunity to publish the Gold Sally Awards on Leap Day! For new readers of 18 Cinema Lane, the Gold Sally Awards are one of my blog’s annual traditions to commemorate 18 Cinema Lane’s anniversary. These award categories are created by me, based on topics I’ve brought up on my blog. While most of the awards are the same as in 2023, a few of them have changed. For those awards, I’ll explain the significance of those categories. But just like last year, I will discuss why I chose each recipient. So, now, the moment you’ve been waiting for! The 6th Annual Gold Sally Awards are about to begin!

6th Annual Gold Sally Awards Winners created by me, Sally Silverscreen.

The “She Won’t Give Me My Chocolate” Award

(Best Quote from a Movie)

“Heroes know who they are” – Evel Knievel, Evel Knievel (1971)

In my review of the 1971 biopic, Evel Knievel, I mentioned how surprised I was by the story’s messages and themes. One example I provided was when Evel explained to Linda why he doesn’t want a lettermen sweater. To elaborate how he doesn’t need to prove he’s a hero, Evel says to Linda, “heroes know who they are”. This quote is not only though-provoking, it is also profound without trying too hard to be. To me, that quote (as well as that scene) was given a lot of thought by the biopic’s creative team!

The Standing Ovation Award

(Character Most Deserving of Receiving Their Full Potential)

Sydney Carton from Hallmark Hall of Fame’s A Tale of Two Cities

My favorite character from Hallmark Hall of Fame’s A Tale of Two Cities is Sydney Carton! Because of his personality, I wanted to know more about him. I was also curious to see where his story would go. Without spoiling this movie, though, all I’ll say is Sydney deserved more than the story provided him. Similar to Kili from The Hobbit trilogy, Sydney is, in my opinion, the MVP of A Tale of Two Cities!

The They Deserve an Award Award

(An Actor or Actress Who Deserves Recognition)

Sarah Drew (for her performance in Guiding Emily)

In the Hallmark Movies & Mysteries film, Guiding Emily, the protagonist loses her eyesight. This prevented Sarah Drew, the actress who portrayed Emily, from using her eyes for emotional expression. However, she used other acting techniques to her advantage; such as body language, vocal inflections, and movements of the mouth. Sarah’s performance in Guiding Emily was so good, I specifically highlighted it in my review of the 2023 movie! Through versatility in her acting abilities, Sarah’s portrayal of Emily appeared believable! In fact, I think Sarah should have, at least, been nominated for an award.

The Cowboy Award

(Character Who Makes an Unnecessary, Drastic Change)

Margot from Christmas at Castle Hart

Cowboy, from the Hallmark Hall of Fame movie, A Painted House, is a character I’ve mentioned on 18 Cinema Lane. The context was when he was featured in the dishonorable mentions section of my list of the top ten characters ruined by Hallmark. Because I won’t spoil the aforementioned Hallmark Hall of Fame film, all I will say is Cowboy makes an unnecessary, drastic change that, in my opinion, was jarring to witness. It was also jarring to watch Margot, from Christmas at Castle Hart, drastically change. For most of the 2021 movie, Margot comes across as a somewhat annoying character obsessed with Irish stereotypes. But when her sister, Brooke, confronts her about how they should stop lying, Margot becomes a selfish and manipulative person. She even convinces Brooke into believing that if their lies fall apart, it will be Brooke’s fault. In an instant, Margot became a character who cared more about her career than about how others would be affected by her lies.

The “Based on a Book I Haven’t Read Yet” Award

(Movie Based on Source Material I Have Not Yet Read)

Hallmark Hall of Fame’s Caroline?

Hallmark Hall of Fame’s Caroline? became my favorite movie of 2023! After watching the film, I remembered how it was based on the book, Father’s Arcane Daughter by E. L. Konigsburg. As well as trying to check out as many Hallmark Hall of Fame movies as I realistically can, I’d like to read as many books based on Hallmark Hall of Fame movies as possible. In fact, I even created a Hallmark Hall of Fame reading challenge! Since I haven’t read Father’s Arcane Daughter yet, I need to find an excuse to finally seek this book out.

The Edward Boult Award

(Missed Opportunity in Cinema)

Not Addressing Bullying in The Best Christmas Pageant Ever

If you’re going to create a story for a younger audience, you need to be mindful when it comes to addressing serious, real-world issues. That’s because a younger audience can be very impressionable. The creative team behind the 1983 television production, The Best Christmas Pageant Ever, should have kept this in mind when they chose to not address bullying in their film. As I talked about in my review, the Herdman children bully their peers. The bullied children don’t stand up for themselves against the Herdmans. It also doesn’t help how the adults in the story do not resolve this issue. Because of everything I just said, some younger audience members might believe they shouldn’t bring up bullying if it occurs in their life.

The Top Gun: Maverick Award

(Movie That Exceeded My Low Expectations)

A Biltmore Christmas

When I included Top Gun: Maverick in my list of the top ten best movies I saw in 2022, I admitted how skeptical I was about the movie’s quality. As I said in that list, sequels released over ten years after their predecessor can be hit or miss. But Top Gun: Maverick exceeded my expectations, becoming my second favorite picture from that year! In 2023, I was skeptical about A Biltmore Christmas due to its hype and publicity. Similar to Top Gun: Maverick, A Biltmore Christmas was so good, it ended up in the top three of my year end best movies list! Like I said in my list of the best movies I saw in 2023, there were so many things Hallmark got right in this Christmas movie. It also helps how the story provided a different type of narrative for Hallmark’s Christmas presentations. Because of how much I liked A Biltmore Christmas, I’m looking forward to seeing what Hallmark has in store for this year’s Christmas season!

The Dishonorable Mention Award

(Worst Movie from the Dishonorable Mention Category)

Christmas at Castle Hart

Because I didn’t see enough movies to include an honorable mention category, I wasn’t able to award a winner for the Honorable Mention Award. Since my worst movies of 2023 list featured a dishonorable mention category, I was able to find a recipient for this year’s Gold Sally Awards. Christmas at Castle Hart is the most disappointing film to not make my worst films of the year list. In my review of that movie, I stated how I had waited since 2018 to see Stuart Townsend star in a Hallmark production. Sadly, the final product Hallmark gave me wasn’t worth the wait. Stuart’s acting talents were underutilized to the point where his character, Aiden, spent most of the story driving the female protagonist around Ireland. Christmas at Castle Hart contained other flaws, such as bad CGI and an underutilized subplot. Looking back on the Dishonorable Mention Award, I realized how both recipients were Hallmark films.

The Far and Few Between Award

(Best Movie from a Genre, Film Category, or Decade Not Often Covered on 18 Cinema Lane)

Frankenweenie (2012)

Even though 18 Cinema Lane has been around for six years, there are some areas of cinema that are not often covered on my blog. One of those areas is animation. While it’s rare for an animated movie to receive a movie review, it’s even rarer for an animated movie to appear on my best films of the year list. 2012’s Frankenweenie achieved these feats in 2023, presenting a collection of good creative choices as well as heart. This movie was such a pleasant, memorable surprise, which surpassed my expectations. I’m thankful I took the chance to write about it!

The Hallmark Hall of Fame Award

(Movie That Feels Like It Belongs in the Hallmark Hall of Fame Collection)

Guiding Emily and A Biltmore Christmas

When I shared my overall impression of Guiding Emily, I said how the movie felt reminiscent of Hallmark Hall of Fame projects of yesteryear. This is because the film tells a more unique story from what Hallmark typically creates today. In the case of A Biltmore Christmas, the story provided a different type of narrative within Hallmark’s Christmas films. It also included a historical component to the story. When Hallmark Hall of Fame was in its prime, historical/period films or movies with inspirational themes were added to the Hallmark Hall of Fame collection. If this collection still existed, Guiding Emily and A Biltmore Christmas would have been chosen as 2023’s Hallmark Hall of Fame presentations.

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen