Tag: blogathon

Take 3: Mr. & Mrs. Smith (1941) Review

On By 18cinemalaneLeave a comment

I am back from a two-week hiatus to deliver a brand-new review for The 4th Master of Suspense Blogathon! As a consistent participant in this event, I wanted to, once again, broaden my cinematic horizons by writing about another film from Alfred Hitchcock’s filmography. Before joining the blogathon, I remembered how Patricia (from Caftan Woman) recommended the 1941 movie, Mr. & Mrs. Smith, to me. This year’s edition of the Master of Suspense Blogathon gave me the perfect excuse to, finally, check the film out! Mr. & Mrs. Smith is now the seventh movie from Alfred’s filmography I’ve reviewed. However, most of his films covered on 18 Cinema Lane have been, in my opinion, just ok. Will the 1941 picture stand out among this aforementioned collection? Solve this mystery by reading my review!

Mr. & Mrs. Smith (1941) poster created by RKO Radio Pictures

Things I liked about the film:

The acting: In Mr. & Mrs. Smith, Carole Lombard portrays the titular Mrs. Smith, Ann Smith/Krausheimer. One aspect of Carole’s performance I liked was how expressive it was! A great example is present during a conversation Ann shares with her husband, David, toward the beginning of the movie. When Ann asks David if he’d marry her if he had a chance to do it again, she appears hopeful. A smile can be seen on Ann’s face and there’s a bright shine in her eyes, paired alongside her easy-going demeanor. But when David matter-of-factly answers Ann’s question by saying, “No”, Ann’s attitude completely changes. Not only do her eyes adopt a “thousand-yard stare”, her mouth is also slightly turned into a frown. Though Ann tries to mask her disappointment by bouncing back to her easy-going demeanor, her facial expressions perfectly capture what’s in her mind and heart.

Robert Montgomery portrays David Smith, the titular Mr. Smith in the 1941 movie. Similar to Carole’s performance, Robert effectively utilized facial expressions to convey emotions, feelings, and thoughts. While he’s at his office, David calls Ann about their upcoming dinner plans. During his conversation with Ann, the combination of David’s smile, playful glances, and a flirty hint in his voice showcases how much he loves his wife. Meanwhile, Jack Carson’s portrayal of Chuck “Chucky” Benson was a standout! Despite appearing in only three scenes, Chuck became memorable due to the consistent charisma and confidence Jack brought to his character. The scene where Chuck calls Gloria and Gertrude/Gertie is such a great example of how distinct Chuck’s personality is compared to David’s, as David’s awkward phone call emphasizes Chuck’s head-strong confidence.

The on-screen chemistry of Carole Lombard and Robert Montgomery: As I already mentioned in this review, David and Ann are the titular Mr. and Mrs. Smith. From the very beginning of the story, it is evident there is true love between them. This is because Robert and Carole’s on-screen chemistry successfully convinces the audience their characters are not only married, but also in love! When David and Ann cuddle together one morning, David holds Ann in a gentle embrace. Their relaxed body language perfectly captures the comfort they share in their relationship. As David asks her questions, Ann simply nods her head and moves her eyebrows. His tone of voice is calm, emphasizing the gentleness of David and Ann’s interaction. This is a very romantic moment because there’s a sense of tenderness, understanding, and respect between them. But because of the story’s conflict, Ann and David share so few romantic moments together, making me wish they had received more in the script.

Jeff’s apartment: One evening in Mr. & Mrs. Smith, David’s friend, Jeff, takes Ann to the 1939 New York World’s Fair. Due to the rain they endure, they go to Jeff’s apartment to escape the cold. When I first saw his apartment on screen, I did not expect it to look the way it did. Because Jeff is a lawyer who appears to enjoy the finer things in life, such as classy suits and fancy restaurants like The Florida Club, I imagined his apartment consisting of dark wood walls, richly upholstered furniture, and maybe a large painting of a horse. But when Jeff’s apartment appeared on screen, it was very bright. The space was surrounded in light colored wood walls. Not only were there light-colored curtains hanging by the windows, there was plenty of lighting featured throughout Jeff’s apartment. Table lamps, dark metal wall sconces, and a dark metal sconced chandelier contribute to the apartment’s brightness. A light-colored fireplace hearth is nicely paired with a darker marble. At least six built-in bookshelves compliment the space, adding a sense of coziness. These combined elements not only make Jeff’s apartment look like a visually appealing cozy cottage, the set design subverted my expectations as well!

The 4th Master Of Suspense Blogathon banner created by Maddy from Classic Film And TV Corner

What I didn’t like about the film:

Lack of open communication: Toward the beginning of Mr. & Mrs. Smith, David and Ann establish how they are honest with each other and respect one another, showcasing how open communication is a key component of their relationship. But the conflict of the 1941 movie revolves around how Ann and David aren’t officially married due to a misunderstanding with their marriage license. While David tries to persuade Ann to remarry him, Ann desires to move on and fall in love in another man. This difference in perspective was caused by Ann believing David wasn’t honest about the conflict with her. If they had openly communicated to each other similar to how they did toward the beginning of Mr. & Mrs. Smith, Ann and David would have saved so much time and frustration. David and Ann being unable to see eye to eye feels almost like part of their relationship was deceptive.

A prolonged conflict: I’ve mentioned in the past how I’m not a fan of Hallmark films where the story features a character who says they’re going to do something, but spends most of the story not doing the thing they said they were going to do. 1941’s Mr. & Mrs. Smith adopts this exact type of story. As I’ve already said in this review, the conflict revolves around how Ann and David aren’t officially married due to a misunderstanding with their marriage license. At first, David and Ann express a strong interest in getting remarried. But they spend most of the movie’s hour and thirty-five-minute run-time doing everything but that. Because Ann and David stopped prioritizing their desire to get remarried, Mr. & Mrs. Smith’s conflict felt prolonged. It also kind of felt like David and Ann took longer than necessary to reach the intended point.

A rushed ending: I’m not going to spoil 1941’s Mr. & Mrs. Smith, in case any of my readers haven’t seen this movie yet. But what I will say is the ending was, in my opinion, rushed. Like I just said in my review, Ann and David spend most of the movie’s hour and thirty-five-minute run-time doing everything but getting remarried. This creative decision made Mr. & Mrs. Smith’s conflict feel prolonged. While that conflict receives a resolution, it doesn’t happen until the last fifteen minutes of the film. Plus, it was wrapped up too quickly to the point it doesn’t feel satisfying or earned. In fact, I was caught off guard by how rushed the ending was, especially since Alfred Hitchcock is a director who, usually, knows how to conclude a story.

New York City skyline with letters image created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/new-york-skyline-typographic-silhouette_719554.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.

My overall impression:

In my opinion, Alfred Hitchcock’s filmography fluctuates in quality. While I’d say Strangers on a Train is my favorite film directed by Alfred, I was not a fan of The 39 Steps. For me, Mr. & Mrs. Smith falls somewhere in the middle. The acting was solid from the entire cast, especially when it came to the performances of Carole Lombard, Robert Montgomery, and Jack Carson. I liked Robert and Carole’s on-screen chemistry so much, I wish David and Ann had received more romantic moments together. Not only did Jeff’s apartment look visually appealing, it also subverted my expectations. But what hurt Mr. & Mrs. Smith was prolonging the conflict to the point of rushing the ending. It didn’t help how, more often than not, Ann and David lacked open communication, contributing to the story’s prolonged conflict. However, I appreciate Alfred’s attempt at telling a type of story outside his claim to fame. While Mr. & Mrs. Smith wasn’t a suspenseful picture, it did hold my intrigue, as I wanted to know what would happen next.

Overall score: 6 out of 10

Have you seen 1941’s Mr. & Mrs. Smith? Which film from Alfred Hitchcock’s filmography do you wish I’d review? Please tell me in the comment section!

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

Take 3: Hamlet (2000) Review

On By 18cinemalane3 Comments

Among the three times I’ve participated in the Classic Literature on Film Blogathon, I reviewed To Kill a Mockingbird, 1948’s The Three Musketeers, and The Grapes of Wrath. Looking back on these selections, I’m surprised I haven’t chosen a title from William Shakespeare sooner. In fact, as of July, 2026, the only Shakespeare adaptation I covered on 18 Cinema Lane (so far) is the 2000 film, Romeo Must Die, which I reviewed all the way back in 2019. So, you could say another article about a Shakespeare adaptation is long overdue. Because it fits the criteria for the Classic Literature on Film Blogathon and because it was recommended by Hamlette (from Hamlette’s Soliloquy), I will review the 2000 television movie, Hamlet! Similar to Romeo Must Die, the TV film version of Hamlet is a “modern” adaptation of a famous William Shakespeare story. But this time, the production “is revisioned in America at the turn of the 20th Century” (according to IMDB). Did I enjoy watching Hamlet as much as or more than Romeo Must Die? Thanks for joining me for this review, as we’re now about to answer that question!

Hamlet (2000) poster created by Hallmark Entertainment, Spare Room Productions, Artisan Home Entertainment, Cowboy Booking International, and Lions Gate Films Home Entertainment

Things I liked about the film:

The acting: Campbell Scott portrays Hamlet in the 2000 adaptation of William Shakespeare’s story. If I could describe Campbell’s performance in one word, it would be ‘fluid’! During the famous “To be or not to be” monologue, Campbell adopts a variety of facial expressions, vocal inflections, emotions through the eyes, and even movements of the head to showcase Hamlet’s ever-changing mood. Not only that, Campbell’s transitions between emotions are so effortless, Hamlet possesses a captivating presence within the movie. Ophelia also has a captivating presence in Hamlet! Portrayed by LisaGay Hamilton, Ophelia’s expressions of emotion always appeared genuine. A great example is when she is sharing her concerns about Hamlet with her father, Polonius. With a furrow in her brow and speaking carefully in a calm yet concerned voice, Ophelia gives her father (and the audience) a reason to take note of her serious observations. Blair Brown delivers a strong performance as well, portraying Hamlet’s mother, Gertrude! Whether frightened by the horrifying emotional deterioration of her son to her joy as she awaits the start of a play, Blair carries her character so believably, it was easy to forget I was watching an actress portray a character. What worked in her performance’s favor was her understanding of how and when to utilize emotions to her advantage. Even though I liked the three performances mentioned, I thought the cast as a whole was strong!

The set design: The original source material of Hamlet revolves around royalty. This component of the text was translated to the 2000 adaptation, as Hamlet and his family are sometimes referred to by their royal titles. Since the majority of this film version of Hamlet takes place within Hamlet’s family’s home, the set design effectively represented their opulence. Home décor pieces, like gold sconces, rich wood furniture, and ornate rugs, found their place throughout the story. Chairs boasted intricately woven designs, appearing as their own form of art. Carved detailing was present on a wooden staircase, a stone fireplace, and even on a ceiling in one scene. Smaller pieces of set design were not overlooked either, such as a burning piece of paper being placed on a silver platter. Not only did Hamlet’s set design make its project visually elegant, it complimented Shakespeare’s source material as well!

Use of music: When a movie’s creative team incorporates music into their project, the intended mood of a given scene can be elevated. This is how the creative team behind Hamlet approached the musical element of the 2000 adaptation. Whenever a suspenseful moment took place, such as the ghost of Hamlet’s father suddenly appearing, the rhythmic sound of drums played in the background. Because the sound of the drums was loud and with the drums possessing a quicker rhythm, the feelings of fear, confusion, and even irritation rose among the characters who could visualize the ghost for themselves. Raised adrenaline from the audience can also happen because of the drum music’s incorporation within Hamlet. That music contributes to a viewer’s feeling of being on the edge of the seat, eager to discover what will happen next!

The 2026 Classic Literature on Film Blogathon banner created by Paul from Silver Screen Classics.

What I didn’t like about the film:

Shakespearian speech in a “modern” story: As I mentioned in my Romeo Must Die review, I was not a fan of Romeo + Juliet. The reason is how the characters adopt Shakespearian speech while the movie appears to take place in 1995-1996. The 2000 adaptation of Hamlet makes the same creative choice. Like I brought up in this review’s introduction, Hamlet “is revisioned in America at the turn of the 20th Century”. So, the references to kings, Denmark, and Norway don’t make sense. Having the characters speak in the Shakespearian manner sounds jarring, as it breaks the illusion of immersion of the late 1800s to early 1900s presented on screen. Because I don’t hear Shakespearian speech often, I not only had to actively pay attention to what was happening in the film (or else I would have missed important context), I was sometimes confused by what the characters were saying. This aspect of the project became a frustrating part of my movie-viewing experience.

Forgotten storylines: Ophelia’s brother, Laertes, desires to travel to France. Even though their father, Polonius, allows Laertes to journey to France, he has his doubts of whether his son will behave himself in a gentlemanly fashion while there. This storyline from Hamlet became forgotten as the film progressed. That was due to the script prioritizing Hamlet’s downward spiral. Even though Laertes returns later in the movie, his trip to France wasn’t brought up. I was disappointed Laertes’ French travels didn’t play a bigger role in the 2000 adaptation of Hamlet, as there was potential for that narrative to be intriguing. However, I’m not sure how much influence Laertes’ adventure through France had in the original source material.

The run-time: The Hamlet adaptation from 2000 received a run-time of two hours and fifty-eight minutes (according to IMDB). Similar to my thoughts on Gods and Generals and The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, Hamlet’s run-time could certainly be felt. The pace of Hamlet is mostly slower, with a few action-packed, suspenseful scenes incorporated into the story. That, along with the movie’s two hour and fifty-eight-minute run-time, makes the 2000 adaptation feel unnecessarily stretched out. Like my experience watching The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, I was zoning in and out while watching Hamlet, trying not to fall asleep during this movie-viewing experience. Had the 2000 adaptation of Hamlet been split into two parts, like Hallmark’s 2004 adaptation of Frankenstein, the movie wouldn’t run the risk of feeling like an endurance test.

Hand-written letter image created by Veraholera at freepik.com. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/background”>Background vector created by Veraholera – Freepik.com</a>. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/love-letter-pattern_1292902.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

My overall impression:

To review or not to review, that is the question (ok, I couldn’t resist making that reference, especially in this review). Back in 2019, I shared in my Romeo Must Die review how much I liked that film. Because it was a “modern” adaptation of Romeo and Juliet featuring martial arts, the 2000 movie was successfully able to create a unique version of William Shakespeare’s story. Seven years later, after watching the 2000 adaptation of Hamlet, I find the picture just ok. The creative team behind Hamlet had visual ambition, setting their interpretation “in America at the turn of the 20th Century”. This ambition could be seen in the set and costume design, attempting to bring the late 1800s to early 1900s back to life through elegance and historical accuracy. But having the characters adopt Shakespearian speech breaks that illusion of immersion. Having a two hour and fifty-eight-minute run-time also negatively impacts the film’s chances for rewatchability. However, the cast as a whole gave strong performances, with everyone doing a good job, acting wise, with the material they received. The movie itself is also a competently made project, incorporating elements that enhanced the movie-viewing experience, such as the use of music. But at the end of the year, when I look back on the movies I’ve seen (and even reviewed), the adaptation of Hamlet from 2000 will not be a film I reflect on as fondly as other films.

Overall score: 6-6.1 out of 10

Have you seen the 2000 adaptation of Hamlet? Are there any “modern” adaptations of William Shakespeare’s stories you’d like to check out? Please share your thoughts in the comment section!

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

Take 3: Young Washington Review

On By 18cinemalaneLeave a comment

2026 marks the 250th birthday of the United States of America’s founding. Because of this major milestone, MovieRob selected July’s Genre Grandeur theme as “Red, White and Blue Movies”. This means a chosen film has to deal “with The American Revolution, American Patriotism or related to the 4th itself”. For my selection, Young Washington, I had planned to publish my review on July 4th. But because of my schedule at the time, I didn’t get the chance to see the 2026 picture as soon as I had hoped. Now that I’ve seen the movie, I can finally post my review for MovieRob’s Genre Grandeur Blogathon! As I already mentioned in this introduction, a chosen film for the event had to deal “with The American Revolution”. When George Washington appears in entertainment media revolving around this period in history, the story itself focuses on what led up to the signing of The Declaration of Independence. In Young Washington, however, the story explores the events that shaped George into the leader history remembers him as today. Reflecting on The American Revolution related pieces of entertainment media I’ve seen, heard, or read, Young Washington’s approach to this specific time period seems to have addressed a creative void.

Young Washington poster created by Wonder Project, 2521 Entertainment, Angel, Provident Films, Radar Pictures, Red 56, Ten Ton Studio, and Wild Atlantic Pictures

Things I liked about the film:

Incorporation of the story’s natural landscape: IMDB lists Ireland as Young Washington’s primary filming location. Yet the story is set in Virginia. Since the majority of the movie takes place outdoors, the forest landscape of America’s tenth state was given center-stage through long and medium shots. Clear blue waters, rolling green hills, and what appears to be pine trees literally and figuratively represent the “calm before the storm”, as the Ohio Territories are at the center of a major conflict. This same landscape was also shown at different times of the day as well as in different climates. On a few occasions, snow covered the forest floor and trees. Paired with a gray-blue sky, this landscape visually presented a peaceful environment, despite the uncertainty this type of terrain brings. The incorporation of Young Washington’s natural landscape added natural beauty to the film. This creative decision also reminded me of Europe’s natural landscape receiving importance in I Am David, showing a side of the United States of America that could be easily taken for granted.

The acting: As I just mentioned in this review, the Ohio Territories are at the center of a major conflict in Young Washington. The reason is because the French desire to claim the land as their own. In order to convince the French to leave, George is tasked with persuading a French military officer named Joseph Jumonville. In a scene where George negotiates with Joseph, Joseph, at first, appears very jovial. His huge smile, jolly demeanor, and laughter gives George (and the audience) the impression things will go George’s way. But as soon as George addresses the French residing on the Ohio Territories, Joseph’s attitude immediately changes. His intense stare and sharp tone of voice lets George (as well as the audience) know he means business. Joseph’s change in attitude causes a shift in the scene’s atmosphere, raising the stakes of the situation. Despite having a limited presence in Young Washington, Joseph became such a memorable part of the movie! That’s because the actor who portrayed Joseph, Clement Toyon, gave a performance that was captivating due to his flawless transition between attitudes. With that said, I wish Joseph made a few more appearances in the film.

While George and a surveyor named Christopher are surveying the Ohio Territories, they cross paths with Half-King Tanacharison. Similar to Joseph Jumonville, Half-King Tanacharison appears in Young Washington for a limited period of time. Also similar to Clement Toyon’s portrayal of Joseph, Half-King Tanacharison was so memorable because of Ryan Begay’s performance! Whenever he showed up in the story, Half-King Tanacharison carried himself with a strong confidence, his demeanor letting others know how he should be taken seriously. At the same time, Half-King Tanacharison carried a gentleness which emphasized how he was a leader who sought fairness. These combined characteristics in demeanor allowed Ryan’s performance to contain a commanding presence. Because we’re on the subject of leaders, I must talk about William Franklyn-Miller’s portrayal of George Washington! Like I said about Liev Schreiber’s portrayal of Orson Welles in RKO 281 and Tom Hulce’s portrayal of Amadeus in Amadeus, William brought humanity back to George’s name by finding the heart of the “genius” and putting some genuine emotion behind it. What I also liked about William’s performance is how it possessed a strong sense of realism. This element didn’t show an actor portraying a historical figure, but, instead, a young man becoming the leader he was destined to be. Working in William’s favor as well is his understanding how to utilize emotion and when to increase or decrease the intensity of those emotions.

Historical accuracy: Filmmakers have the ability to create the illusion of immersion. This illusion makes the audience feel immersed in a movie’s world, giving them a reason to stay invested in the story. One way to achieve the illusion of immersion is through historical accuracy. When a film’s creative team adopts that element of storytelling, research and attention to detail must be prioritized in order to effectively bring the chosen time period back to life. While watching Young Washington, the historical accuracy could be seen as well as felt! One of my favorite examples is when George attends a party at the Belvoir plantation. Every room within the plantation is lit by candles. Throughout scenes taking place at the plantation, the lighting was consistently dim. Looking back on the movies I’ve seen (and even reviewed) relying on historical accuracy, I never thought about how a film’s lighting could affect a film’s historical accuracy, let alone illusion of immersion. The example I brought up of the dim lighting in Young Washington allows the audience to grasp how different lighting options were in the 1700s.

The dialogue: An underrated film-making element is the quality of a script’s dialogue. If the dialogue among a movie’s characters is good, it can become a memorable component of the movie itself. As I watched Young Washington, there was dialogue that stood out to me because of how good it was! When George applies for the British Army, he is ultimately rejected due to his social status. To prove his worth, George presents his collection of quotes he wrote down while being tutored by his half-brother, Lawrence. But George is told how an imitation of great men doesn’t make him one. This quote not only encourages George to forge his own path in life, it also foreshadows George’s future. Earlier in the story, Lawrence teaches George how to play chess. During the lesson, Lawrence says how a pawn can take a king. This quote was, once again, clever foreshadowing, as George’s role in the American Revolution helped the Thirteen Colonies break away from a king ruled government to form the United States of America. The two examples of dialogue I presented in this review show how much thought and effort went into the screenwriting as well as how the dialogue was delivered!

Children holding American flags during a sunset image created by rawpixel.com at freepik.com. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/people”>People photo created by rawpixel.com – http://www.freepik.com</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

What I didn’t like about the film:

Inconsistent incorporation of subtitles: Earlier in this review, I brought up how George and Christopher cross paths with Half-King Tanacharison while surveying the Ohio Territories. Christopher and Half-King Tanacharison share a conversation, despite never meeting before. Half-King Tanacharison and Christopher’s conversation is not in English, yet no subtitles appear on the screen during their conversation. But any other time characters speak to one another in a language that isn’t English, subtitles are present on the screen. This inconsistency became noticeable to me by the third non-English conversation characters shared in Young Washington.

A missing “And then what happened” segment: In movies based on true stories, there is sometimes a segment toward the end of the movie explaining what happened to the story’s key individuals after the events presented in the movie. But Young Washington lacked this kind of segment. Toward the end of the 2026 film, on-screen text reveals a few of the events leading up to the signing of the Declaration of Independence. However, what happened to key people from Young Washington, like Sally Cary, David Frisk, and even Robert Dinwiddie, was not brought up. This creative decision left me disappointed, as I wanted to know more about the people in the story.

Some underutilized talent: Before watching Young Washington, I knew Kelsey Grammer starred in the movie. From what I remember, he was heavily featured in the movie’s marketing. At the end of the film, Kelsey himself delivered a message on the film’s importance. Yet he appeared in Young Washington in two scenes as Lord Fairfax. One of my family members almost forgot Kelsey was cast in the movie due to his very limited screen-time. While I understand why Kelsey starred in the film for a short period of time, this was one example where, to me, talent was underutilized.

Since colonial style hats were worn throughout Young Washington, including a photo of the small colonial style hat from my Oh Lil Christmas Tree collection made sense. Screenshot taken by me, Sally Silverscreen.

My overall impression:

The best way I can describe Young Washington is a “hero’s journey” woven into a history lesson. Throughout the 2026 movie, the audience sees George experience both trials and triumphs. What the audience of Young Washington also sees is solid acting performances, immersive historical accuracy, and a beautiful forest landscape. They can hear dialogue that is well written and delivered, as well as good messages and themes. Another strength of Young Washington is the ebb and flow between action-heavy, suspenseful scenes and quieter, slower-paced scenes. This ebb and flow maintained the story’s intrigue, keeping me invested in what was happening on screen. There are flaws within the 2026 picture, like inconsistent incorporation of subtitles and some underutilized talent. But, in my opinion, there’s a lot Young Washington got right when it comes to film-making. Now that we’re at the halfway point of 2026, I can honestly say I’ve seen more movies, so far, I liked than didn’t. Young Washington is one of those films belonging to the first category of movies I liked!

Overall score: 8 out of 10

Have you seen Young Washington? Is there a movie set around the American Revolution you like? Please tell me in the comment section!

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

Take 3: The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford Review

On By 18cinemalane8 Comments

June’s theme for Genre Grandeur is “Movies With Genre Bending themes”. I spent a lot of time researching potential titles due to how specific this theme is. But with this month’s Genre Grandeur overlapping with the Legends of Western Cinema Week Blogathon, I chose the 2007 movie, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. According to an article of The 10 Best Genre-Bending Movies Of All Time from the website, Taste of Cinema, “What makes the film [The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford] one of the true genre-bending westerns is how it chooses to present it mythology of the west”. The author of the article, Mark Serravalle, explained how “The characters are more life-like and complicated than how they are made out in the stories that are told about them”. I will admit that, even though I’ve heard of him, I know very little about Jesse James. In fact, the titles I’ve selected for past Legends of Western Cinema Week Blogathons have revolved around either fictional or fictionalized stories. Therefore, reviewing The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is not only a learning opportunity for 18 Cinema Lane, it’s allowing my blog to travel newer paths within the realm of blogathons.

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford poster created by Warner Bros., Virtual Studios, Scott Free Productions, Plan B Entertainment, Alberta Film Entertainment, and Warner Bros. Pictures International

Things I liked about the film:

The acting: The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford received two nominations at the 80th Academy Awards. One of those nominations was given to Casey Affleck for his portrayal of the titular Robert Ford. Looking back on the 2007 movie, I can agree with the Academy’s decision! What I liked about Casey’s performance is his ability to say so much without saying anything at all. A perfect example is when Robert is reflecting on the similarities he and Jesse share. Throughout this recollection, Robert appears disappointed and even defeated. His eyes and the slight frown his mouth adopts give these feelings away. But every now and then, a smile shows up on Robert’s face and his eyebrows even move upwards. This moment effectively illustrates how Robert has become disillusioned by the reality of who Jesse really is, yet fondly remembers his fabricated image of him.

If I had to be brutally honest, I think Brad Pitt should have been nominated for his portrayal of Jesse James. This is because, through his acting talents, Brad presented Jesse as the opposite of what one might expect. When it comes to legendary figures like Jesse James, presentations of being “larger than life” and a “showman” could give the impression Jesse was an untouchable, unstoppable force. But Brad’s portrayal of Jesse emphasizes the human he was; capable of feeling fear, making mistakes, and constantly looking over his shoulder. A perfect example of this point is when Jesse is interrogating Robert’s cousin, Albert. When Albert claims he doesn’t know Robert’s whereabouts, Jesse beats Albert up because he thinks Albert is lying. During the beating, the anger on Jesse’s face is very evident. But as he realizes Albert is, indeed, telling the truth, Jesse’s face quickly goes from angry to confused. He adopts a “thousand yard stare” as well as a look of disbelief, wondering how he could be so wrong. Several minutes later, as he’s preparing to leave on horseback, Jesse bursts into tears, realizing he just crossed a line.

The cast of The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford gave performances that were well-done. However, I was pleasantly surprised to see Jeremy Renner star in the film as Wood Hite! Before reviewing the 2007 film, I had seen Jeremy’s portrayal of Clint Barton/Hawkeye throughout the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) and his portrayal of Aaron Cross from The Bourne Legacy. But what was different about Jeremy’s portrayal of Wood is how he had to rely more on emotion in order to carry the character through the story. During an exchange between Wood and Robert, Wood shares how his mother is Jesse’s father’s sister. He tries to use his familial connection as leverage against Robert, smugly smiling and his tone of voice sounding very arrogant. When Robert questions this familial connection, Wood’s face quickly changes to a look of shock. His tone of voice becomes defensive and his eyes grow wide. This example shows how, even though Jeremy appeared in The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford for a limited period of time, the versatility of his acting talents were on full display!

The cinematography: Remember when I said The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford received two nominations at the 80th Academy Awards? Well, the other nomination was given to Roger Deakins for the Cinematography category. Once again, this is a decision I agree with the Academy on! Two of the best examples of the cinematography’s mastery in The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford happens during a train robbery taking place toward the beginning of the movie. When the train stops right in front of Jesse, only the train’s front light is shining. White smoke forms around both the train and Jesse. Because of the minimal lighting, Jesse is presented as a silhouette. He’s presented as a silhouette again when he’s walking beside the train, emerging from the aforementioned white smoke. Only the light from the train’s window illuminates the scene, giving the scene itself a warm, orange glow. Through the cinematography, these two examples elaborate how Jesse was depicted by those who didn’t know him well; a mysterious myth who seized the attention of others.

More unique ideas brought to the Western genre’s table: It seems like the two most common settings in the Western genre are deserts and plains. But what if I told you a forest is where parts of The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford take place? While there were plains in the 2007 film, I’d argue forests were featured in the story the most. Because forests are usually not known for being a Western genre location, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford brings something more unique to the genre’s table. In Western genre films revolving around legendary figures like Jesse James, the script typically focuses on the prime of the figure’s life, highlighting the most exciting, thrilling parts of their story. But The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford showcases Jesse and his gang’s life after crime. Even the train robbery I referenced earlier was not presented as a thrilling, exciting event. Instead, that train robbery is shown as a scary event full of uncertainty, fear, and even violence. These screenwriting choices gave the 2007 movie a sense of honesty that isn’t always found in the Western genre.

Legends of Western Cinema Week banner created by Hamlette from Hamlette’s Soliloquy and Heidi from Along the Brandywine

What I didn’t like about the film:

The run-time: As listed on IMDB, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford’s run-time is two-hours and forty-minutes. Similar to my thoughts about Gods and Generals’s run-time, the 2007 film’s run-time can definitely be felt. The story of Jesse James and his gang’s life after crime is told at a slower pace. That paired with the aforementioned run-time causes The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford to feel unnecessarily stretched out. I found myself zoning in and out while watching the movie, concerned I’d fall asleep during my movie-viewing experience. One solution to this flaw would have been to trim scenes that linger, such as a scene where Jesse stares at his brother, Frank, for what seems like a minute.

A somewhat misleading title: When I recently reviewed The Naked Jungle, I criticized the movie for its somewhat misleading title. Even though the titular jungle played a role in the story, it didn’t appear until about the last forty minutes of the hour and thirty-five minute film. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford possesses the same flaw. Based on the title alone, one would believe the titular event would serve as the story’s primary focus. But that event doesn’t end up happening until the film’s last twenty-seven minutes. This means during The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford’s two-hour and forty-minute run-time, most of that time is spent leading up to the event itself. The audience is forced to wait over two hours for Jesse’s other shoe to drop.

The dialect: The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford takes place during the late 1800s. This setting in time encouraged the film’s creative team to adopt historical accuracy. While that aspect of filmmaking was achieved visually, it was also achieved vocally, as the cast spoke with the dialect (as well as the dialogue) of the story’s time. Despite these historically accurate achievements, there were times I found it difficult to understand what the characters were saying. Because I don’t hear that dialect (and dialogue) consistently, I was forced to actively pay attention to what was being said. Otherwise, there’s a good chance I would have missed important context.

Sheriff badge image created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/brown-cowboy-label-set_1543252.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/vintage”>Vintage vector created by Freepik</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

My overall impression:

The more I think about The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, the more it reminds me of Gods and Generals and The Naked Jungle. Not only does the 2007 movie possess a run-time that is, in my opinion, too long (like Gods and Generals), its title is also somewhat misleading (like The Naked Jungle). While I appreciate the creative team’s efforts to make their film look and sound historically accurate, I sometimes found it difficult to understand what the characters were saying. But despite these flaws, it’s evident there was merit put toward the project. Besides the historically accurate appearance of The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, the cinematography made the film visually interesting. The train robbery scene proves how the movie’s creative team took advantage of film’s visual medium to present their intended ideas. The cast as a whole gave good performances, especially Casey Affleck, Brad Pitt, and Jeremy Renner. But what I appreciate the most about The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is how more unique ideas were brought to the table of the Western genre. From setting parts of the story in a forest to showcasing Jesse and his gang’s life after crime, these creative choices prevent the Western genre from becoming stagnant. It also illustrates how creatively diverse the Western genre can be.

Overall score: 6 out of 10

Have you seen The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford? What creatively unique ideas from the Western genre have stood out to you? Let me know in the comment section below!

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

Here’s the link to the article I referenced in this review if you’re interested in reading it: https://www.tasteofcinema.com/2023/the-10-best-genre-bending-movies-of-all-time/

Take 3: The Naked Jungle (1954) Review

On By 18cinemalane2 Comments

This is my third time participating in the Luso World Cinema Blogathon. Back in 2021, I wrote about the 2005 film, Ladies in Lavender, which I thought was just ok. Then last year, I reviewed Jasmine Guy’s episodes of Touched by An Angel. While the episodes, “Sympathy for the Devil” and “Lost and Found”, were fine, “Clipped Wings” became my least favorite Touched by An Angel episode reviewed on 18 Cinema Lane, so far. But these previous entries for the Luso World Cinema Blogathon were chosen based on a particular actor’s or actress’s involvement in a project. For this year’s event, I decided to select a movie based on its location. Therefore, I picked the 1954 film, The Naked Jungle! According to the criteria for the Luso World Cinema Blogathon, The Naked Jungle takes place in Brazil. The movie was also recommended to me by Maddy (from Maddy Loves Her Classic Films). Both Charlton Heston and Eleanor Parker are no strangers to 18 Cinema Lane. Not only have I covered 1959’s Ben-Hur, I’ve also written about Interrupted Melody, The Man with the Golden Arm, and Return to Peyton Place!

The Naked Jungle (1954) poster created by Paramount Pictures

Things I liked about the film:

The acting: In this review’s introduction, I stated how both Charlton Heston and Eleanor Parker are no strangers to 18 Cinema Lane. After reviewing three of Eleanor’s movies, what I’ve noticed is how Eleanor uses emotion to her advantage. Despite only writing about one of Charlton’s films, Ben-Hur, I can appreciate the consistency of his acting strengths. These compliments can be applied to Eleanor’s and Charlton’s portrayal of Joanna and Christopher in The Naked Jungle! Throughout the 1954 picture, Christopher is a stoic man who prioritizes his plantation. So, when Joanna comes into his life, he carries frustration, pride, and even entitlement in his eyes, through his voice, as well as his body language. Meanwhile, Joanna is a sweet and gentle woman who is open-minded to her new life with Christopher. But when Christopher becomes argumentative with her, Joanna shows little to no fear, effortlessly replacing sweetness with fierce confidence. Because of how strong both Charlton’s and Eleanor’s performance was, their characters were interesting to watch! One of my favorite scenes in The Naked Jungle is when Joanna meets a Commissioner who happened to board the same boat as her. Portrayed by William Conrad, the Commissioner had the charisma and friendly personality to brighten up a room. I could even sense nice on-screen chemistry between William and Eleanor. These factors made me look forward to scenes featuring the Commissioner!

The set design: When it comes to set design, sometimes less is more. This was definitely the case for The Naked Jungle! My favorite set was Joanna’s room because of how pops of color were incorporated into the space. Standing out against the white walls and shutters were gold sconces, dark wood furniture, and bright hued chairs. The vanity area was, in my opinion, the most impressive! An ornate, gold mirror proudly hung on the wall. Right underneath the mirror was a dark wood vanity table, nicely complimenting the mirror’s shiny frame. A chair with green cushions provided a visually appealing bridge between the darker and brighter hues. Though all the pieces of décor were simplistic in design, the overall room presented an elegant, classy, and timeless space!

The dialogue: I sometimes come across films where some of the dialogue is so clever, it sticks in my memory. The Naked Jungle happens to be one of those films! An example of memorably clever dialogue is when Joanna arrives in Brazil for the first time. As Christopher’s “number one man”, Incacha, introduces himself, even bringing up his title, Joanna addresses herself as Christopher’s “number one wife”, as she desperately wants to know where her husband is. The quick response and immediate play on words make this response cordial and somewhat hilarious. Another great example arrives after Joanna and Christopher meet. When Christopher tells Joanna how the tropics have their own schedule, Joanna asks, “What time is bedtime”? Christopher replies by saying, “Whenever you wish, madam”. Joanna then tells Christopher with a hint of playful sarcasm, “I wouldn’t want to upset your schedule”. This comeback works because of the screenwriting and Eleanor’s performance!

6th Luso World Cinema Blogathon banner created by Le from Crítica Retro and Beth Ann from Spellbound With Beth Ann

What I didn’t like about the film:

Lack of on-screen chemistry: As I previously talked about in this review, I liked the acting performances of Charlton Heston and Eleanor Parker. But what I didn’t like about their portrayals of Christopher and Joanna was their lack of on-screen chemistry. In this case, the fault lies in the screenwriters. Not only was the relationship between Joanna and Christopher tense, this tension between them lasted the majority of the movie. By the time Christopher and Joanna finally got around to appreciating the other’s company, this renewal of chemistry came too little too late. That writing choice made it difficult, for me, to determine if Charlton and Eleanor truly possessed any on-screen chemistry.

The “locals” as background characters: “Locals” of the story’s Brazilian setting make appearances throughout The Naked Jungle. But these “locals” aren’t given much to do in the story. Among them was a gentleman who not only possessed Mayan ancestry within his family tree, he also carried around a small head known as his “treasure”. Because of these details, I thought he’d make a fascinating addition to The Naked Jungle’s script, using his family history and maybe even his “treasure” to help resolve the film’s overarching conflict. Unfortunately, this gentleman barely said anything in the one scene he was featured in. Even Incacha, the “number one man” of Christopher, receives a smaller role within the script. Despite dealing with a personal conflict of his own, that conflict has little bearing over the movie’s plot. I was disappointed by the creative decision to turn the “locals” into background characters. This is because their inclusion in the film made me want to learn more about their culture and perspective.

A somewhat misleading title and synopsis: According to The Naked Jungle’s synopsis on IMDB, “a 2-mile-wide, 20-mile-long column of army ants” plan to destroy anything in their path, including Christopher’s plantation. With a movie titled, The Naked Jungle, one would think the titular jungle would play a significant role in the story. But the jungle doesn’t actually appear in the movie until about the last forty minutes. Meanwhile, the “army ants” I previously brought up aren’t shown on screen until about the last thirty minutes of the movie. Keeping in mind The Naked Jungle has a run-time of an hour and thirty-five minutes, this means the majority of the script prioritizes the tension between Christopher and Joanna. These creative choices I talked about make the title and synopsis seem kind of misleading.

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. 

My overall impression:

Have you ever seen a movie where it wasn’t bad, but it just didn’t meet or exceed your expectations? That’s how I felt after watching The Naked Jungle. Before reviewing the 1954 film, I expected a story where a husband and wife worked together to solve the problem of an ant infestation. But what I got instead was a movie that prioritized the tense relationship of Joanna and Christopher, the aforementioned husband and wife. While there was an ant infestation and the titular jungle did play a role in the story, these parts of the script didn’t arrive until toward the end of the movie. But as I waited for these arrivals, I came to appreciate certain aspects of The Naked Jungle. Not only did I like the “less is more” approach to the set design, I also liked how clever some of the dialogue was. I even liked the acting performances, including those from Eleanor and Charlton. When it comes to The Naked Jungle, however, I was left desiring more. Maybe I’ll review a film where the “locals” are given center stage.

Overall score: 6 out of 10

Have you seen The Naked Jungle? Is there a movie from Charlton Heston’s and/or Eleanor Parker’s filmography you’d like to see me review next? Please tell me in the comment section!

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

We Now Conclude Commencements of The “Eddie’s Year” Blogathon

On By 18cinemalane2 Comments

Hello everyone! Like any graduation ceremony, it’s time to conclude The “Eddie’s Year” Blogathon. This year’s event was a success, as it had a similar turn-out to last year’s Food & Film Blogathon. I apologize for not publishing my book review of Stranger Things: Flight of Icarus by Caitlin Schneiderhan. I actually didn’t get to completely read the book, as I had other blogging projects to write and publish around the time of The “Eddie’s Year” Blogathon. However, I was able to deliver my Comparing with the Critics reviews of King Kong Lives and The Fly. Those reviews, as well as the event’s other entries, showcased the creative storytelling 1986 had to offer. Through reading these entries, I was introduced to films that are new to me. I also learned something new and discovered interesting points about Eddie Munson I never thought of before. There will be a new blogathon on 18 Cinema Lane in 2027! The event’s details won’t be revealed yet, as I haven’t even chosen a theme. Until then, you can check out my upcoming reviews, editorials, and lists! To everyone who participated in The “Eddie’s Year” Blogathon, thank you so much for your contribution.

The “Eddie’s Year” Blogathon banner created by me, Sally Silverscreen. Original image created by 21 Laps Entertainment, Monkey Massacre, Netflix, and Upside Down Pictures.

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

Take 3: The Children’s Hour Review

On By 18cinemalane6 Comments

Audrey Hepburn is no stranger to 18 Cinema Lane. In the eight years I’ve been blogging, I have reviewed The Nun’s Story (which I liked), Funny Face (which I also liked), and Roman Holiday (which was, in my opinion, ok). For Classic Film And TV Corner’s Audrey Hepburn Blogathon, I decided to pick a movie I don’t often hear in the discussion of Audrey’s films. Over the years, I’ve heard 1961’s The Children’s Hour has been considered “controversial”. Though I wasn’t sure if the movie still carried that title today or if it once held that title when the film was originally released. Wanting to find an answer to that question, I selected The Children’s Hour to write about for the event. Another actor who’s no stranger to 18 Cinema Lane is James Garner. Despite only reviewing one of his films, Hallmark Hall of Fame’s Promise, I have seen other projects from his filmography, such as Atlantis: The Lost Empire, The Notebook, and Hallmark Hall of Fame’s Decoration Day. So, I was pleasantly surprised to discover James starred in The Children’s Hour.

The Children’s Hour poster created by The Mirisch Corporation and United Artists

Things I liked about the film:

The acting: As I said in this review’s introduction, I’ve written about three of Audrey Hepburn’s films; The Nun’s Story, Funny Face, and Roman Holiday. Through her roles in these films, Audrey has proven to be a very expressive actress who allows her characters to adapt to any situation. This sentiment holds true in The Children’s Hour, as Audrey portrays a teacher named Karen. One great example of Audrey’s expressiveness takes place during a conversation Karen shares with a doctor named Joe (portrayed by James Garner). Throughout their conversation, Karen shares her desire to get married. As soon as Joe agrees to marry Karen, her face lights up, complete with wide eyes and a big ear-to-ear smile. It also helps how this reaction from Karen appears genuine. Speaking of James Garner, I also want to talk about his portrayal of Joe. During his and Karen’s aforementioned conversation, Joe is frustrated by lack of funds and resources at the hospital where he works. As he takes Karen for a car ride, Joe carries that frustration on his face, from a narrowed stare to his mouth turning in a scowl. The look on Joe’s face is consistent from a previous conversation he shared with Karen’s friend, Martha (portrayed by Shirley MacLaine). In his and Martha’s conversation, Joe expressed his frustration through his facial expressions and tone of voice. This consistency, as well as his versatility, showed just how strong of a performance James gave in The Children’s Hour!

Like I mentioned earlier, Audrey portrays a teacher named Karen. This means throughout The Children’s Hour, Karen’s students appear in the story from time to time. Out of the young actresses who received lines in the movie, two of the strongest performances came from Karen Balkin and Veronica Cartwright! In The Children’s Hour, Karen portrays Mary, a manipulative girl who never takes ‘no’ for an answer. Meanwhile, Veronica portrays Rosalie, a fellow student of Mary’s who is terrified of Mary. Whenever Mary tries to control Rosalie into following a plan of hers, Rosalie’s terror for Mary is visibly displayed through her wide eyes and appearance of fear on the rest of her face. Even when she’s questioned about the rumor about Martha and Karen, Rosalie bursts into tears as Mary’s figurative grip on her is just too powerful. On the other hand, Mary’s mood changes depending on the situation. One moment, as she’s presenting flowers to another teacher named Lily, Mary displays a sweet demeanor with a smile on her face. But when Karen catches Mary in a lie about those flowers, Mary’s attitude immediately changes to being defensive, complete with a sharp tone of voice and an angry look in her eyes. The strong execution of Karen’s and Veronica’s performance made me, as a viewer, effectively empathize with Rosalie and despise Mary.

The dialogue: I brought up earlier in this review how Shirley MacLaine portrayed Karen’s friend, Martha. One of the reasons why I liked her performance was her execution of the dialogue. To add to this, some of the dialogue in The Children’s Hour was cleverly written. A great example takes place during a conversation between Martha and Karen. While bringing up the subject of money, Karen addresses her concern for Martha’s wardrobe. Martha casually and confidently responds to Karen’s concern by saying, “I’m a skirt-and-blouse character. We’re always in style”. Later in The Children’s Hour, Martha and Lily have a disagreement. During this disagreement, Martha suggests Lily leave to pursue her Broadway dreams, even offering to give her money. Lily refuses to accept Martha’s offer and says she’d “rather scrub floors first”. Martha, her voice fueled with sarcasm, replies “You’ll change your mind after the first floor”. The cleverness of the dialogue’s writing, as well as the dialogue’s delivery, was such a pleasant surprise!

The mise-en-scène: While watching The Children’s Hour, I noticed interesting mise-en-scène that was sometimes utilized during the movie. One example shows Mary spying on Karen and Martha as they share a conversation in Martha’s room. The door to Martha’s room is in the background near the left-hand side of the frame. In the foreground near the right-hand side of the frame is Mary’s face hiding behind the door of her room. Shots like the one I described present the illusion of putting the audience in a scene alongside the characters. This creative decision was, for me, an unexpected yet memorable aspect of the movie!

The Audrey Hepburn Blogathon banner created by Maddy from Classic Film And TV Corner

What I didn’t like about the film:

Telling instead of showing: Throughout The Children’s Hour, Martha and Karen recount how Mary’s rumor negatively impacted their lives and careers. They planned on filing a libel and slander lawsuit, but ended up losing that lawsuit. The rumor became national news, as Martha mentions it made the front page. But none of these events are shown in the film. No newspapers are presented with that rumor as headline news. There’s no courtroom scenes either, so the audience is forced to take Karen and Martha’s word for it. Because of the script’s reliance on telling instead of showing, the severity of the situation isn’t fully felt. The closest The Children’s Hour gets to addressing the severity is when the students actively leave the school.

Not addressing Mary’s accountability: Karen, Martha, and even Joe are hated by Mary because they do what Mary’s grandmother failed to do: hold Mary accountable for her bad decisions. This hatred is what caused Mary to start the rumor about Martha and Karen in the first place. But The Children’s Hour spends so much time focusing on the fallout from the rumor, Mary isn’t shown facing any accountability for creating the rumor. Sure, the rumor is debunked and Mary’s grandmother discovers the truth. However, the script never addresses what happened to Mary when the truth came to light. As a viewer who was waiting for Mary to face her comeuppance, I was disappointed.

Drawn-out scenes: There were a few times within The Children’s Hour where scenes were drawn out longer than necessary. One example is when Joe confronts Karen about the rumor. While I understand this scene was intended for Karen to debunk the rumor and re-confirm the status of her and Joe’s relationship, the scene itself felt like it lasted between five to ten minutes. Because there’s only so much story you can tell in an hour and forty-eight minutes, I believe scenes like the one I described should have been trimmed a bit.

Chalkboard image created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-photo/mathematical-operation-written-on-blackboard_1357576.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/background”>Background image created by Freepik</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

My overall impression:

In the world of cinema, there are three types of movies: those that stand the test of time, those that were ahead of its time, and those that are a product of its time. Personally, I think The Children’s Hour fits in the latter category, primarily due to how the dialogue tries to skirt around the rumor instead of being straightforward about it. However, I don’t believe this makes The Children’s Hour a bad movie. In fact, the 1961 picture has its merits. The acting was solid, from Audrey’s portrayal of Karen and James’ portrayal of Joe to the performances from the younger actresses like Veronica and Karen. I also liked how clever some of the dialogue was and how the mise-en-scène was utilized. But the creative team behind The Children’s Hour didn’t take the opportunity to expand the story beyond the stage it was adapted from. The script relied on telling instead of showing, which prevented the severity of the situation from being fully felt. Some scenes were drawn out longer than necessary and Mary’s accountability for starting the rumor isn’t addressed in the story. Therefore, I like Funny Face and The Nun’s Story over The Children’s Hour.

Overall score: 6.1 out of 10

Have you seen The Children’s Hour? Which movie from Audrey Hepburn’s filmography would you like to see me review next? Let me know in the comment section below!

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

Comparing with the Critics – Best of 1986 – The Fly

On By 18cinemalane4 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!

Out of the movies Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel picked in Siskel & Ebert & the Movies’ ‘Best of 1986’ episode, I believe Eddie Munson would choose The Fly. As I explained in my 1986 introduction of Comparing with the Critics, Eddie’s story teaches that, sometimes, there’s more than meets the eye. Plus, Eddie’s imagination and creativity not only works in his favor as a Dungeon Master, it’s also helped his friends during their time in the Upside Down. From the way Gene and Roger described The Fly in the aforementioned ‘Best of 1986’ episode, it seemed like a different kind of horror and sci-fi film. Roger claims “the poignancy” of The Fly “is interesting in a horror film”. Meanwhile Gene not only states “there was, if you think about it, a certain nobility to The Fly”, he also says “the movie is beautifully made”. Films from the horror and sci-fi genre are infrequently covered on 18 Cinema Lane. In fact, the only sci-fi and/or horror movies included in the Comparing with the Critics series, so far, are The Bride and Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome, which were both released in 1985. But what can be appreciated is the creativity and imagination woven into those two genres, whether it’s how the duel in the Thunderdome was filmed in Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome or giving Viktor a “hero’s journey” in The Bride. Though The Fly ended up on Roger’s top twenty best films of the year list, it did earn a place on Gene’s ten best films of ’86 list at number ten. However, despite not seeing every or most of the movies from 1986, The Fly would not be on my list of the top ten best films of that year. I also don’t think the film would be on Eddie’s top ten best films list either.

The Fly (1986) poster created by 20th Century Fox, Brooksfilms, Province of British Columbia Production Services Tax Credit, and SLM Production Group

While sharing his thoughts on The Fly, Roger tells Gene, “Goldblum, I think, deserves an Academy Award nomination”. While I agree with Roger’s sentiments on Jeff Goldblum’s portrayal of Seth Brundle, I also believe Geena Davis (who portrayed Veronica “Ronnie” Quaife) deserved a nomination from the Academy. Individually, Geena’s and Jeff’s performance was solid. From the tearful heartbreak Ronnie displays as Seth becomes unrecognizable to Seth’s erratic behavior over the course of the story, Jeff and Geena made their characters interesting to watch. But together, Geena and Jeff share very nice on-screen chemistry! In The Fly’s very first scene, Seth and Ronnie meet at a scientific event. Their interaction contains a sense of awkwardness, as they don’t yet know how they feel about the other person. But because Ronnie and Seth appear comfortable with who they are as individuals, the conversation isn’t embarrassing or cringey. Instead, it kind of comes across as flirty. Incorporating smiles, Seth’s widening eyes, and Ronnie’s glances away from Seth add to their growing feelings for each other. Even tilts of the head indicate how equally engaged they are in their interaction. The more I saw Seth and Ronnie together, the more I wished Jeff and Geena starred in another movie together portraying a couple!

Movie award essentials image created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/background”>Background psd created by freepik – http://www.freepik.com</a>. Image found at freepik.com. 

Gene tells Roger during their discussion of The Fly how he doesn’t believe science fiction movies, but was able to believe The Fly. One of the reasons why, according to Gene, is “it has to do with makeup”. The Academy certainly agreed with Gene, as The Fly won the Best Makeup category at the 59th Academy Awards. I also agree with Gene and the Academy. The idea of a human transforming into a fly sounds pretty disturbing and grotesque. Through the makeup design of Stephan Dupuis and Chris Walas, that aforementioned transformation was brought to life on screen in a believably horrifying way. At the start of Seth’s transformation, he develops little hairs on his back and his face appears discolored. But as the story progresses, so does his transformation. Seth’s teeth become pointy before falling out. His fingers morph together as his hands turn into the feet of a fly. Seth’s body even develops lumpy growths that make him look like a complete stranger. What adds to the horrifying nature of the makeup design is not just how believable the transformation itself appears, but also how realistic the effects look.

The “Eddie’s Year” Blogathon banner created by me, Sally Silverscreen. Original image created by 21 Laps Entertainment, Monkey Massacre, Netflix, and Upside Down Pictures.

During their coverage of The Fly in the ‘Best of 1986’ episode of Siskel & Ebert & the Movies, Roger comments on the believability of the movie. He tells Gene how “the screenplay was written and acted smart”. Roger also appreciated how Seth wasn’t a scientist “who speaks in cliches out of the thirties”. To add to Roger’s compliments, I’ll say that I liked how the story’s scientific ideas were woven into the script. Throughout The Fly, the topic of teleportation is discussed by Ronnie and Seth. What started as a magazine interview turns into a collaborative book. Over time, the focused topic changes to genetic fusion between Seth and a fly. Ronnie’s discovery and Seth’s computer lead to this specific topic being brought up. The way these scientific subjects were written into the story, as well as the dialogue, sounded intelligent enough to make the characters seem like they knew what they were talking about. As a viewer, I wasn’t confused by these concepts or didn’t feel like homework before watching the movie was required.

Scared audience image created by Katemangostar at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-photo/terrified-friends-watching-horror-movie-in-cinema_1027311.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/people”>People image created by Katemangostar – Freepik.com</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

As Gene sings the praises of The Fly, he refers to the movie as “a great adventure”. In my experience watching adventure stories unfold on screen, there’s usually a sense of urgency. This urgency can be the reason for reaching a particular destination, exploring a specific location, or finding a person or object. A featured scene from The Fly on Siskel & Ebert & the Movies’ ‘Best of 1986’ episode shows Seth revealing to Ronnie his continual transformation toward becoming a fly. That scene made me believe there would be a race against the clock to either slow down or reverse Seth’s transformation process. Sadly, the script did not provide a race against the clock because the movie lacked a sense of urgency. In fact, The Fly contains a slow-burn story where Seth slowly becomes a fly over the course of most of the film. The 1986 movie is one of those movies where the audience waits for the inevitable to happen. Because the title of the film, The Fly, gives the inevitable away, it makes the film itself predictable. This predictability removes some of the story’s suspense and intrigue.

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

In the introduction of this review, I stated how The Fly would not be on my list of the top ten best films of 1986. I also said I didn’t think the film would be on Eddie’s top ten best films list either. The reasons are the movie’s lack of urgency and predictability. I could honestly picture Eddie either falling asleep during the movie or leaving the theater during the film. As I said in my review, The Fly is a slow-burn story and its predictability removes some of the story’s suspense and intrigue. But I don’t believe The Fly is a bad movie. The individual and combined performances of Jeff Goldblum and Geena Davis made their characters interesting to watch, as well as gave their characters nice on-screen chemistry. Chris and Stephan’s makeup effects effectively elaborated on the horrifying concept of a human becoming a fly. I also liked how the story’s scientific ideas were woven into the script. But despite all that praise, I didn’t like or love The Fly as much as Gene or Roger did.

This review was brought to you by

Sally Silverscreen

Comparing with the Critics – Worst of 1986 – King Kong Lives

On By 18cinemalane5 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 1986 introduction of Comparing with the Critics, I said Eddie Munson would see Roger Ebert’s and Gene Siskel’s warnings about King Kong Lives as a challenge. That’s because this movie was deemed so bad, no clips from it were featured on ‘The Worst Movies of 1986’ episode of Siskel & Ebert & the Movies. According to Roger and Gene, they received letters from King Kong Lives’ film company stating no clips of the movie were allowed to be shown on Gene and Roger’s national show, yet could be shown on their local show in Chicago. Wikipedia states the film company, DEG (De Laurentiis Entertainment Group), forbade the critics from showing clips on Siskel & Ebert & the Movies “unless they promised to give positive reviews”. Because neither Roger or Gene complied with DEG’s request, they used the experience as a warning to their audience not to see King Kong Lives, with Gene saying, “If you don’t believe me or Roger, believe the film company that, think about it, couldn’t find a single scene that it wanted you to see”. From my experience watching the “Best of” and “Worst of” episodes of Gene and Roger’s show, a featured movie with no clips presented for it is extremely rare. That’s why King Kong Lives not only became so memorable to me, but why I wanted to review the movie, wondering if it was truly that bad. But now that I’ve seen King Kong Lives, saying it’s so bad it justified the refusal of featuring clips on Siskel & Ebert & the Movies is a stretch.

King Kong Lives poster created by De Laurentiis Entertainment Group (DEG)

Gene claims King Kong Lives, which is a sequel to King Kong from 1976, “should have been a classy production”. I’m not sure “classy” is the right word to describe this film. What I will say is King Kong Lives is interesting. One of the factors that made the movie interesting was the use of suits to bring King Kong and Lady Kong to life. In order for King Kong to be saved, Lady Kong is incorporated into the story to provide a blood transfusion for King Kong. Over the course of the film, Lady Kong and King Kong develop a romantic relationship. Through the performances of Peter Elliott and George Antoni/Yiasoumi, King Kong and Lady Kong’s interactions became such a pleasant surprise! The blend of body language, tilts of the head, and movements of the eyes and mouth effectively expressed emotions, thoughts, and feelings without any dialogue. The actual construction of the suits allowed King Kong and Lady Kong to appear believably realistic. With all that said, I found Lady Kong and King Kong’s relationship adorable!

Heart image created by Dashu83 at freepik.com. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/background”>Backgroundimage created by Dashu83 – Freepik.com</a>. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-photo/happy-valentines-day-and-heart-card-with-happy-valentines-day-and-heart_1747001.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

When Hank “Mitch” Mitchell (portrayed by Brian Kerwin) is introduced in King Kong Lives, he gives the impression of being hungry for money and fame. This is because Mitch agreed to give Lady Kong to the Atlantic Institute. But as the movie goes on, Mitch subverts expectations by showing how he genuinely cares about Lady Kong’s wellbeing. One example is Mitch’s observation of how King Kong appeared to be treated better than Lady Kong. He’s even concerned about the wellbeing of Dr. Amy Franklin (portrayed by Linda Hamilton). When Amy tells Mitch how she’s spent her evening keeping an eye on King Kong after his heart surgery, Mitch encourages Amy to get some sleep. Mitch’s empathy and compassion toward Lady Kong, Amy, and even King Kong made him such a likeable character!

Heartbeat image created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/medical-logo_763775.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/logo”>Logo vector created by Freepik</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

Speaking of Brian Kerwin and Linda Hamilton, I’d like to take some time to talk about their performance. Over the course of King Kong Lives, Amy and Mitch’s attraction for one another grows. The on-screen chemistry between Linda and Brian was, in my opinion, very sweet. The relationship between Mitch and Amy felt genuine because of the combined performance of Brian and Linda. But, individually, they gave solid performances as well. When Lady Kong arrives at the Atlantic Institute through a plane trip, some photographers attempt to break into the plane to take Lady Kong’s picture. Mitch pulls those photographers out of the plane, taking note of how stressed Lady Kong appears. In that moment, Amy gains respect for Mitch as he puts Lady Kong’s needs before his own desires. When Mitch looks at Amy, she nods toward him, a look of understanding in her eyes. Later in King Kong Lives, Amy performs heart surgery on King Kong. As Mitch watches the operation unfold, he is consistently shown grimacing or appearing worried. From the look in his eyes to the movements of his mouth, Mitch’s reactions throughout the surgery appear believable. The examples I provided illustrate how both Linda and Brian put genuine effort into their performances!

The “Eddie’s Year” Blogathon banner created by me, Sally Silverscreen. Original image created by 21 Laps Entertainment, Monkey Massacre, Netflix, and Upside Down Pictures.

Prior to watching and reviewing King Kong Lives, I had never seen a King Kong movie. Therefore, my knowledge of the King Kong Cinematic Universe is very limited. Based on what I do know about King Kong, he is, sometimes, presented as a threat to humans. This depiction was chosen for the 1976 film, with clips from that film shown at the beginning of King Kong Lives. With that said, I was really confused why the Atlantic Institute would spend the time, energy, and money (seven million dollars to be exact) to keep King Kong alive? I was hoping an explanation would be provided through the dialogue. But, unfortunately, no explanations were included in the script. It seems like the creative team behind King Kong Lives expected their audience to already know why certain events were happening. But when certain things happen, such as a change in attitude toward King Kong, explanations that make sense within the world of that film’s story need to be shared. Lack of explanations in King Kong Lives is my biggest criticism of the movie.

Adhesive bandage image created by aopsan at freepik.com. Background photo created by aopsan – www.freepik.com

During their discussion of King Kong Lives, Roger recounts his experience seeing the movie at a theater. He tells Gene about a swinging door located behind the theater’s back row of seats. The children who attended Roger’s screening of King Kong Lives found that swinging door more entertaining than the film itself because, according to Roger, “there was nothing on the screen that was even slightly entertaining to them”. Though I found the film interesting enough to keep me invested in the story, I can understand why those children would find the movie boring. When someone chooses to watch a King Kong picture, they typically expect King Kong to be destructive. While he was destructive in King Kong Lives, those moments were far and few between. From my limited knowledge of the King Kong Cinematic Universe, King Kong Lives tells a different kind of story from previous films, including its directly connected predecessor from 1976. I appreciate this newer approach to the lore of King Kong instead of repeating the same ideas. On the other hand, however, it seems like King Kong Lives’s creative team may have told a story that felt too different to the audience.

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

As a movie blogger, I totally understand Roger’s and Gene’s decision to refuse DEG’s request of showing clips of King Kong Lives on their Chicago show, but not their national show. In fact, I commend the critics for sticking to their morals and integrity. But DEG’s refusal to have clips of their film shown on Siskel & Ebert & the Movies did more harm to their film than good. Not only did this decision deny Gene’s and Roger’s audience an opportunity to choose for themselves whether they wanted to see the movie, it also made King Kong Lives, in my opinion, seem worse than it was. To me, the 1986 picture is a fine, interesting-enough presentation that kept me invested in the story. It took the King Kong lore in a newer direction than its predecessors, even addressing unique ideas, such as what it would take to save King Kong. But the lack of explanations left me confused why certain events were happening. In fact, the more I think King Kong Lives, the more questions I have about the King Kong Cinematic Universe. Are the King Kongs in the series’ later films a direct descendent of King Kongs from earlier chapters? Is there an overarching story woven into the series? Which events are officially a part of canon? Though these questions won’t get answers in this review, there is one thing I will say. King Kong Lives is another movie I disagree with the critics on.

This review was brought to you by

Sally Silverscreen

Take 3: Gods and Generals Review

On By 18cinemalane4 Comments

Out of the movies from Robert Duvall’s filmography, I’ve written about To Kill a Mockingbird (which I liked), The Terry Fox Story (which I also liked), and Network (which I wasn’t a fan of). While looking through his filmography for Taking Up Room’s Robert Duvall Tribute Blogathon, I discovered he starred in the 2003 movie, Gods and Generals. I hadn’t seen this film prior to the event. But because of its association with the Movieguide Awards, I had heard of it before. At the 2004 Movieguide Awards, Stephen Lang won an acting award called the ‘Grace Award for Movies’ for his portrayal of General Stonewall Jackson. Gods and Generals also won the ‘Faith & Freedom Award for Movies’ at the 2004 Movieguide Awards. I wasn’t able to find any information about the other nominees for those aforementioned categories. Therefore, I cannot comment on who should or should not have won. But, through my review, I want to determine if, in my opinion, Gods and Generals deserved to be nominated. Selecting the 2003 film also gave me an excuse to review another title of Robert’s.

Gods and Generals poster created by Ted Turner Pictures, Antietam Filmworks, Esparza / Katz Productions, Rehme Productions, Mace Neufeld Productions, and Warner Bros.

Things I liked about the film:

The acting: Since Robert Duvall is the reason why I’m reviewing Gods and Generals, I’ll talk about his acting performance first. In the 2003 movie, Robert portrays General Robert E. Lee. Throughout the movie, I noticed the consistent calmness he brought to his performance. At the beginning of Gods and Generals, General Robert E. Lee turns down an invitation. The tone of voice he adopts is very articulate and matter of fact. There’s a gentleness in his eyes that shows he holds no ill-feelings or disrespect toward receiving the invitation in the first place. Robert’s approach to portraying General Robert E. Lee appeared to have genuine thought and effort put into it. Meanwhile, I liked Jeff Daniels’ portrayal of Lieutenant Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain! Jeff brought a tenderness that made Lieutenant Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain interesting to watch. One of the most captivating scenes in Gods and Generals is when Lieutenant Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain and his wife, Fanny, discuss his upcoming departure to the United States Army. Their interaction is very bittersweet, yet tender. Their gentle tone of voice holds the love they share for each other. Both Fanny (portrayed by Mira Sorvino) and Lieutenant Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain carry sadness on their faces, especially in their eyes, unsure what their future will hold. Jeff’s and Mira’s acting abilities effectively sold the believability of Lieutenant Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain and Fanny’s relationship!

I brought up in this review’s introduction how, at the 2004 Movieguide Awards, Stephen Lang won an acting award called the ‘Grace Award for Movies’ for his portrayal of General Stonewall Jackson. Now that I’ve seen his performance for myself, I can, honestly, say his nomination was well deserved! Stephen brought versatility to his portrayal of General Stonewall Jackson, allowing his performance to be well-rounded. Because of Stephen’s acting talents, scenes he (as General Stonewall Jackson) appeared in were emotionally effective. A great example is when General Stonewall Jackson and his wife, Anna, read the Bible together before he leaves for the Battle of Manassas. The gentle, yet loving tone of voice from both General Stonewall Jackson and Anna (portrayed by Kali Rocha) showed how seriously they took their relationship. The look in their eyes was that of longing, longing for more time together as well as longing to be loved by each other. Anna and General Stonewall Jackson’s interaction in that scene showcased a moment of tenderness, reflection, and true love. This was achieved because of the strength of Stephen’s and Kali’s acting abilities!

Historical accuracy: What can ultimately make or break a historical movie is its historical accuracy. If the creative team behind a historical film effectively executes that production’s historical accuracy, the film in question can present the illusion of immersion. This illusion was achieved in Gods and Generals! From the set design to the costume design and even the finest of details, everything looked and felt like the Civil War era. I was impressed how simple items, like a doll or a piano, appeared to have come straight out of that time-period. Other elements, like the dialect, helped bring authenticity to the production. Looking back on Gods and Generals, the creative team’s research into the Civil War era is very evident!

How long shots were utilized: Long shots can be incorporated into a film for a variety of reasons. In “sword & sandal” films, long shots capture the scope of larger set designs. Films featuring armies, teams, or crowds will showcase the size of those groups through long shots. In Gods and Generals, however, long shots were utilized to present establishing shots (shots that establish a story’s location). One example is when Fredericksburg, Virginia is introduced in the story. The long shot used captured an aerial view of the town. Through this perspective, hues of black, white, green, blue, brown, and even purple appeared to nicely blend together. How the town was shown on screen looked like a watercolor painting! Presenting places like Fredericksburg, Virginia with a long shot helped add visually appealing images to Gods and Generals.

The Robert Duvall Tribute Blogathon banner created by Rebecca from Taking Up Room

What I didn’t like about the film:

The run-time: IMDB lists Gods and Generals’s run-time as a little over three-and-a-half-hours. After seeing the movie, however, I felt like I spent three and a half years watching it. I recognize depicting a historical event through film takes time, whether it be battles or certain individuals interacting with one another. For a historical story like Gods and Generals, there are a lot of moving parts involved. But some scenes in the 2003 film were either drawn out too long or seemed unnecessary. One example is a scene where a soldier (who also happened to be a background character) explained to his fellow soldiers what they should do with his belongings if he dies on the battlefield. Personally, I think Gods and Generals should have been presented as a mini-series. Therefore, the story’s key individuals and events would have received their due diligence.

A dialogue-heavy film: In any movie, including historical pictures, dialogue plays an important role in storytelling. Through dialogue, ideas are expressed, emotions are shared, and characters give pieces of their heart to each other and the audience. But if a movie is dialogue-heavy, it forces the audience to actively pay attention to what they’re watching or else they’ll miss important context. Gods and Generals is a dialogue-heavy film, featuring long stretches of time where characters engage in conversations with one another. What also works against Gods and Generals is its little over three-and-a-half-hour run-time I already brought up in this review. While there were battles and action-heavy scenes throughout the movie, they were far and few between compared to the dialogue-heavy scenes. Having an ebb and flow of action and dialogue-heavy scenes would have maintained a steadier pace.

Underutilizing Robert Duvall and Jeff Daniels: Robert Duvall’s involvement in Gods and Generals is the reason why I wanted to review the film. As I mentioned earlier in this review, I liked Jeff Daniels’ portrayal of Lieutenant Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain. But compared to Stephen Lang and his portrayal of General Stonewall Jackson, it seemed like the acting talents of Jeff and Robert were utilized sparingly. In fact, it got to the point where the movie became ‘The General Stonewall Jackson Show’, with everyone else simply participating in it. Listing Robert, Stephen, and Jeff as Gods and Generals’s top-billed actors feels a bit misleading because of Jeff’s and Robert’s underutilization. This decision also does Robert’s and Jeff’s acting talents a disservice.

Horse with saddle photo created by Topntp26 at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-photo/stallion-black-equine-race-sky_1104246.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/background”>Background image created by Topntp26 – Freepik.com</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

My overall impression:

The way I feel about Gods and Generals is similar to how I feel about the 1994 film, Scarlett. Both projects were competently made, each respective creative team clearly knowing what they were doing. The acting and historical accuracy were the strengths of each movie. But the screenwriting causes Scarlett and Gods and Generals to be a mixed bag. The 2003 film having a run-time of a little over three-and-a-half-hours is, in my opinion, excessive. Not only is Gods and Generals a dialogue-heavy movie, I also felt Robert Duvall’s and Jeff Daniels’ acting talents were underutilized. But what I will say is, for me, Stephen Lang stole the show! His performance was so solid, his Movieguide Awards nomination was well deserved. I’d honestly recommend just watching his scenes because the versatility Stephen brought to his portrayal of General Stonewall Jackson made his performance worth watching the film.

Overall score: 6 out of 10

Have you seen Gods and Generals? Which movie from Robert Duvall’s filmography would you like to see me review next? Let me know in the comment section below!

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen