Are you a fan of Murder, She Wrote? Do you want to participate in a blogathon that is fun and creative? If you answered yes to these questions, then come join my blogathon, Cabot Cove-thon! The event starts on September 27th, so you still have time to sign up. Plus, there are plenty of topics to choose from! To learn more about Cabot Cove-thon, click on the link below.
Celebrating 40 Years of ‘Murder, She Wrote’ with the Blogathon; Cabot Cove-thon!
Whenever I’ve participated in the Legends of Western Cinema Week Blogathon, I, more often than not, review a movie from the Western genre. Since I review Western genre films so infrequently, this blogathon serves as a good opportunity to expand my cinematic horizons. For the 2024 edition, I decided to select a title that has been recommended to me. Suggested by J-Dub from Dubsism, I am reviewing the 1966 film, El Dorado! Years ago, I saw pieces of this movie. At the time, I thought it was boring. But I was willing to give El Dorado a second chance, wondering if my perspective had changed. I also have seen very few films from John Wayne’s filmography. So, reviewing this film gave me a chance to check out more of his movies!
Things I liked about the film:
The on-screen chemistry: Relationships in movies, whether romantic or platonic, can come across believably on screen if there is a strong sense of chemistry between the actors. This is what happened in El Dorado! Toward the beginning of the movie, J.P., portrayed by Robert Mitchum, meets up with Cole, portrayed by John Wayne, to talk about a potential job opportunity. Cole and J.P. carry no-nonsense demeanors, but their cordialness to each other shows the respect between them. The scene’s mood becomes lighter when Maudie, portrayed by Charlene Holt, shows up. Her friendly, playfulness emphasizes the friendship these characters share. When Maudie talks about her late husband and Cole with J.P., the empathetic reflection indicates how much she cares about both Cole and J.P.. Not only was there strong on-screen chemistry among the actors, this strong on-screen chemistry was consistent throughout the film. The on-screen relationships were interesting to watch because of these factors!
The dialogue: One of the most important components of a movie’s script is the dialogue. Through dialogue, characters can memorably stand-out, important information can be shared, and characters’ problems can be solved. The quality of a script’s dialogue depends on how well written it is. While watching El Dorado, I took note of the cleverness of the dialogue. After a son from the MacDonald family dies, Cole visits the family to share the sad news. The patriarch of the family, Kevin, asks what happened, with Cole telling him how he got “a boy to do a man’s work”. Later, when Cole returns to El Dorado, he reconnects with J.P.. When J.P. asks Cole what he’s doing back in El Dorado, Cole tells his friend, “I’m lookin’ at a tin star with a…drunk pinned on it”. Dialogue like the two examples I provided show how cleverly words were used as well as the eloquent ways intended points were phrased.
Breen Code Era moments: As I’ve explained before on 18 Cinema Lane, the Breen Code was a series of guidelines studios had to follow between 1934 and 1954. El Dorado was released in 1966, a decade after the Breen Code Era ended. However, there were moments sprinkled throughout the movie that felt reminiscent of the Breen Code Era. Before Cole leaves El Dorado, he kisses Maudie. The kiss itself isn’t shown on-screen because Cole’s hat is blocking their faces. When Mississippi, portrayed by James Caan, is first introduced to the audience, he uses a knife in self-defense against a man he claims killed his friend. As Mississippi retrieves his knife, the aforementioned man is hidden behind a table to prevent some of the violence from being shown on screen. The way these moments were written and presented were thoughtful presentations of an era gone by.
What I didn’t like about the film:
A prolonged conflict: Before watching El Dorado, I had seen two of John Wayne’s films: Stagecoach and Allegheny Uprising. In those movies, the story revolves around an overarching conflict some of the characters are consistently trying to resolve. While there was an overarching conflict in El Dorado, it primarily resided in the film’s second half. The first half of the movie consisted of a series of loosely connected vignettes. These vignettes, more often than not, contained low stakes. El Dorado’s first and second halves felt like they belonged in their own separate movies.
Inconsistent sense of urgency: Like I just said when talking about El Dorado’s prolonged conflict, the first half of the movie was a series of loosely connected vignettes, while the film’s overarching conflict resided in the story’s second half. Within the second half of the movie, scenes containing low stakes were woven into the production. One example is Cole addressing a back injury he received earlier in the story. El Dorado’s two halves and the low stakes scenes from the film’s second half are two reasons why this movie’s sense of urgency was inconsistent.
Enabling the Sheriff: J.P., the Sheriff of El Dorado, develops an alcohol addiction due to a romantic relationship gone wrong. When Cole and Mississippi go to El Dorado, they, as well as Bull, try to help J.P. overcome his addiction. Mississippi even creates a liquid concoction to sober J.P. up. But hours after receiving Mississippi’s concoction, J.P. is looking for alcohol. Bull tells J.P. exactly where a bottle of alcohol is located, in the upper left-hand drawer of his desk. Later that evening, Cole allows J.P. to go to the local saloon by himself, where he not only purchases a whole bottle of alcohol, he’s also laughed at by the film’s antagonists. J.P. does eventually become sober in order to help his friends. But toward the end of the movie, J.P. shares a shot of alcohol with Bull. If a screenwriter is going to incorporate a serious topic like addiction into their script, they need to be mindful about how that topic is included in the film. In my opinion, the way addiction was addressed in El Dorado could have been more thoughtful.
My overall impression:
El Dorado is not only the third film of John Wayne’s I’ve seen, it’s the second film of John’s I’ve reviewed. Out of these three films, Stagecoach, Allegheny Uprising, and El Dorado, I haven’t found a title that’s left a strong impression on me. Looking back on Stagecoach, I think the movie is just fine. Allegheny Uprising was ok. Now that I’ve seen El Dorado in its entirety, I feel the 1966 project is also ok. The two halves of this movie and the low stakes scenes woven into the movie’s second half are likely the reason for El Dorado’s inconsistent sense of urgency. The topic of addiction could have been handled in a more thoughtful way. However, the movie does have its strengths. Some of these strengths are the on-screen chemistry among the cast and how well the dialogue was written. Personally, I found El Dorado to be a mixed bag. Hopefully, the next film of John’s I watch and review will be stronger than this one.
Overall score: 6 out of 10
Have you seen El Dorado? Which film from John Wayne’s filmography would you like me to review? Let me know in the comment section!
Have fun at the movies!
Sally Silverscreen
One of the best parts about participating in blogathons is being introduced to movies that may be new to you. This is my experience with the 1989 film, In Country! For Taking Up Room’s Norman Jewison Blogathon, I wanted to choose a movie that was more underrated. While searching through Norman’s IMDB filmography, I came across the aforementioned ‘80s title. The synopsis reminded me of My Girl 2, where Vada is attempting to learn more about her mother. What sets In Country apart from the 1994 sequel is how the 1989 movie explores the aftermath of the Vietnam War by having the protagonist search for answers about her father. In 2024, I have reviewed four other films from the 1980s, so far. Similar to titles like Amadeus and Hallmark Hall of Fame’s Pack of Lies, In Country incorporates historical elements into the story. But will the 1989 movie be a pleasant surprise like Amadeus or a disappointment like Pack of Lies? Keep reading my review to find out!
Things I liked about the film:
The acting: In any story, especially one that features a young protagonist, the main character’s likability can determine if the story is worth investing time in. I can only speak for myself, but I liked Samantha “Sam” Hughes’ personality! Though naïve at times, Sam was like a bright ray of sunshine, caring about the people in her life and trying to make her world a better place. What made Sam a likeable character was how genuine her emotions were. After finding a box of her father’s belongings in her mother’s room, Sam leaves a voice message on the phone explaining to her mother how upset she is by her mother’s silence about her father. When she hangs up the phone, the sad look in her eyes and the slight frown perfectly show how hurt Sam feels about her mother’s choices. This is just one example of Emily Lloyd bringing that genuineness to life, allowing her performance to be memorable!
Prior to watching and reviewing In Country, I had seen some of Bruce Willis’ films. His portrayal of Emmett Smith is different from some of his other roles, as he had to rely on emotion instead of action to carry his character through the story. A thunderstorm is causing chaos outside Emmett’s home one evening. Because of his time serving in the Vietnam War, he flinches whenever thunder strikes due to the flashbacks he is experiencing. At the same time, Emmett carries irritation in his voice because he wants the storm to stop and he wants to avoid Sam’s questions. Similar to what I said about Emily Lloyd’s performance, Bruce’s performance felt genuine. Beneath the tough exterior Emmett consistently displayed, he was a man who was trying to live a civilian life as best as he knew how.
Honesty about war and its impact on veterans: Like I just mentioned in this review, Emmett experiences flashbacks one stormy evening due to his time serving in the Vietnam War. These flashbacks not only cause Emmett to flinch every time thunder strikes, they also cause him to go outside, climb up a tree, and yell for someone to show their face. Throughout this scene, Sam asks Emmett questions about what is happening. Unfortunately for Sam, these questions are left unanswered. When Emmett goes outside, Sam calls for Emmett to come back in the house. As Emmett’s mind and heart are beyond the borders of his Kentucky home, Sam feels powerless, unsure of how to help Emmett. The scene I just wrote about is one example of the film’s honesty when discussing war and its impact on veterans. The candid way these subjects were talked about in the movie shows how the movie’s creative team understood the subjects’ significance.
The mise-en-scène: I’ve explained before that mise-en-scène is how a scene is presented in a movie. Mise-en-scène was utilized in several scenes’ favor in In Country. Toward the beginning of the film, a group of U.S. soldiers are wading through the swamps of Vietnam. This moment is presented as a long shot with the view appearing as if the camera is hiding behind the swamp’s foliage. How this scene is showcased to the audience emphasizes the soldiers’ need to stay unseen. Sam, Emmett, and Mamaw travel to Washington D.C. to visit the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. While walking past the monument, a close-up shot captured Mamaw as the names on the monument were gliding past her face. The visuals symbolized how the Vietnam veterans have touched the lives of not just their loved ones, but those in their communities as well.
What I didn’t like about the film:
Sam’s attraction for Tom: While trying to learn more about her father, Sam turns to a veteran named Tom. At the Vietnam veterans’ dance, Sam invites Tom to share a slow-dance with her, where they get a little too close for comfort. After the dance, Sam spends the night at Tom’s house and has sex with him. Up until the slow-dance at the veterans’ dance, Sam never expressed any romantic interest in Tom. Plus, she just graduated from high school and Tom appears old enough to be her father. Not only was this part of the story random, its inclusion in the film was unnecessary, especially since it has no impact on the plot.
The “slice of life” parts of the story: As I’ve been saying in this review, Sam wants to learn more about her father who served and died in the Vietnam War. This part of the story, as well as the parts exploring the veterans’ perspective, was interesting. But those parts made up half the movie. The other half revolved around subplots that were more “slice of life”. When the story turned to the “slice of life” events, I found myself wishing the movie would go back to Sam learning more about her father or Emmett interacting with the other veterans. In fact, I think the movie should have primarily focused on those aforementioned parts of the story.
On-the-nose songs: The inclusion of songs in a movie can make or break a given scene. Sometimes, a song can be so on-the-nose, it doesn’t leave the intended emotional impact. This happened on more than one occasion in In Country. The opening lines of the Bruce Springsteen song, “I’m On Fire” are “Hey, little girl, is your daddy home? Did he go away and leave you all alone?”. This song can be heard on two occasions after Sam decides to learn more about her father, pointing out what the audience already knows. Earlier in this review, I brought up how Sam invites Tom to share a slow-dance with her, where they get a little too close for comfort. The song they dance to is Hank Williams Jr.’s “Ain’t Misbehavin’”, which narrates what’s happening on screen and foreshadows what’s about to come. That song paired with the events that unfold created a scene that left me uncomfortable.
My overall impression:
When I watch a movie, I sometimes imagine how the story would turn out if it was presented in a different way. One recent example is how Hallmark Hall of Fame’s Brush with Fate would have, in my opinion, benefitted by being presented as a multi-part mini-series. I feel similarly about 1989’s In Country. For the most part, the creative team behind the movie appeared to have their hearts in the right place. The honesty about war and its impact on veterans was included in the story in such a candid way, it showed the movie’s creative team understanding the significance of the subjects woven into the script. But this aforementioned honesty, as well as Sam’s search for answers about her father, should have been the film’s primary focus. Therefore, I wish this story had been a road-trip movie, where Sam, Emmett, and Mamaw go to visit the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington D.C., with Sam learning about her father and important life lessons along the way.
Overall score: 6.1 out of 10
Have you seen 1989’s In Country? What’s your favorite film from 1989? Tell me in the comment section!
Have fun at the movies!
Sally Silverscreen
Have you signed up for my Murder, She Wrote themed blogathon, Cabot Cove-thon? If not, there’s still time to join the event! There’s also plenty of topics left to write about! Click on the link below if you want to learn more about Cabot Cove-thon.
Celebrating 40 Years of ‘Murder, She Wrote’ with the Blogathon; Cabot Cove-thon!
For last year’s Broadway Bound Blogathon, I reviewed the
Hallmark Hall of Fame presentation, A Tale of Two Cities. This is an adaptation
from 1980 I liked so much, it was one of the best movies I saw in 2023! While
reflecting on that film, I realized it’s been a whole year since I reviewed a
Hallmark Hall of Fame production. To make up for lost time, I chose to write
about the 1987 Hallmark Hall of Fame film, Pack of Lies! Two years
before this movie aired on television, Pack of Lies premiered on
Broadway, making the Hallmark Hall of Fame movie a good choice for the
blogathon. Pack of Lies is also a Hallmark Hall of Fame film from the ‘80s
I haven’t seen before. One of my aspirations is to see as many Hallmark Hall of
Fame movies as realistically possible. Out of the titles I have seen, I’ve
noticed the mystery genre is rarely represented throughout the Hallmark Hall of
Fame collection. That fact is another reason why I chose to review Pack of
Lies!
Things I liked about the film:
The acting: Ellen Burstyn and Teri Garr portray Barbara
Jackson and Helen Schaefer in Pack of Lies. The friendship of these two
characters highlights how different they are from one another. Helen has a very
outgoing and bubbly personality, a talkative woman who’s willing to solve
problems. Meanwhile, Barbara is more reserved, dressing more modestly and
avoiding conflict whenever possible. Part of why the differences between these
characters were achieved was through the acting abilities of both Ellen and
Teri! They presented the uniqueness of their characters through various emotions
and expressions. When creating a movie where actors portray friends, the believability
of their performances can make or break that illusion. The aforementioned illusion
was certainly created and maintained throughout Pack of Lies!
In stories where a character has some degree of authority,
their personality is usually serious. This can be a challenge for an actor or
actress, as there are few opportunities to utilize a variety of expressions and
emotions. That didn’t stop Alan Bates from portraying Stewart and making that
performance memorable! When Mr. and Mrs. Jackson first meet Stewart, he leaves
a trusting first impression. During this meeting, Alan incorporates eye movements,
vocal inflections, and variations of mouth movements to create an interaction
that appeared realistic. Because of the realistic nature of Stewart’s meeting,
the scene itself contains a sense of realism. This realism is consistently
carried in the movie through the acting performances!
A mystery within a mystery: The meeting between Stewart and
the Jacksons I previously referenced in this review is about how Stewart is
looking for a man named Laurence. The main mystery in Pack of Lies is
discovering who Laurence is and why Stewart is interested in finding him. At
the same time, the legitimacy of Stewart and his mission serve as a second
mystery. Because of the vagueness Stewart provides to the Jackson family, it
leaves both the Jackson family and the audience wondering who Stweart really is
and why he wants to confront Laurence so much. This second mystery provides an
added layer of intrigue to the overall story!
Providing books as gifts: While visiting their friends, Helen
and Peter Schaefer, Barbara and Bob Jackson receive books as gifts from Peter.
Barbara loves art so much, she and Helen take art classes regularly. Meanwhile,
Bob is an employee in the aircraft industry. In the meeting between the Jackson
family and Stewart, Stewart points out a model plane Bob built. From Peter, Barbara
receives a book of drawings from the Clark Institute in Massachusetts. Peter gives
Bob a book about the first flights across the Atlantic. These books were
thoughtful presents Peter took the time and effort to find. Looking back on the
Hallmark films I’ve seen, including those from Hallmark Hall of Fame,
characters receiving books as gifts are rarely shown. Therefore, I appreciate
this creative choice from Pack of Lies’s creative team to fill a
creative void that is, more often than not, overlooked.
What I didn’t like about the film:
Telling instead of showing: In an ideal movie, it’s
important to show and tell what’s happening on screen. But because film is a
visual medium, showing should be emphasized. Unfortunately, in Pack of Lies,
telling was preferred over showing. Throughout the movie, Stewart tells Mr. and
Mrs. Jackson that a man named Laurence Powell is a man of interest. The reason for
this interest is his possible connections to Russian communists. Dialogue is
the only way the truth about Laurence and Stewart’s reason for recruiting the
Jackson family is revealed. The subject of espionage in entertainment media isn’t
always action-packed and adrenaline-fueled. If a creative team knows their
story will have low energy, they should maintain a sense of suspense and
intrigue by showing what’s going on.
Little lapse in time: At the beginning of the movie, Stewart
assures the Jackson family he’ll only observe Laurence for a day or two. As the
story progresses, Stewart’s mission ends up lasting longer than the proposed
one to two days. Like I just said in this review, Pack of Lies
emphasized telling instead of showing. The little lapse in time throughout the
movie is another example of this flaw. Christmas decorations in the Jackson
house are the only indication a significant period of time took place. Prior to
that part of the story, the film looks like events happened within a week.
Things that don’t make sense: As I’ve been saying in this
review, Stewart’s mission is to observe Laurence over a period of time. The more
information revealed by Stewart, the more the Jacksons and the audience learn
Stewart knew more about Laurence than he originally let on. I know the subject
of espionage can be varied and complicated when included in entertainment
media. However, with everything I just said, why didn’t Stewart just arrest
Laurence instead of observing him over multiple days? Why did Stewart need to
get the Jackson family involved in the first place? This is one example where Pack
of Lies doesn’t make sense.
My overall impression:
Hallmark Hall of Fame movies, like any creative endeavor, are
not created equally. As I shared in this review’s introduction, I liked A
Tale of Two Cities so much, it was one of the best movies I saw last year.
Sadly, I can’t say the same about Pack of Lies. The 1987 presentation
was a two hour slow and tedious build-up to a resolution that was underwhelming
and anticlimactic. The cause of these flaws was the emphasis on telling instead
of showing. This is not the first time a Hallmark Hall of Fame movie from the ‘80s
let me down, as I also found 1985’s The Corsican Brothers disappointing.
After watching Pack of Lies, I learned the movie was based on a true
story. Now knowing this, I think the story would have benefitted more had it
become a documentary instead. As I wrap up my review of Pack of Lies, I
reflect on a Hallmark commercial I have seen. In this commercial, a man, whose
first language is not English, is looking for the perfect card for his wife,
who will soon arrive in the United States. When he goes to a Hallmark store,
the man is assisted by an employee named Rose, who helps him find exactly what
he is looking for. Another man who occasionally appears throughout the
commercial reveals the events in the commercial are based on a true story.
Honestly, the story behind that Hallmark commercial is a more fascinating movie
idea than what was presented in this Hallmark Hall of Fame film.
Overall score: 5 out of 10
Have you seen Pack of Lies? Which Broadway show do
you wish received a Hallmark Hall of Fame movie? Tell me in the comment
section!
Have fun on Broadway!
Sally SilverscreenLooking back on Judy Garland’s movies I’ve seen, I can
honestly say I haven’t seen a movie I didn’t like. Even though some pictures were
better than others, I can’t say any of Judy’s films were “bad”. Hoping this
streak will continue, I joined the Third Judy Garland Blogathon by reviewing For
Me and My Gal! This film was recommended by the Brannan sisters from Pure
Entertainment Preservation Society. They not only introduced me to this film,
they introduced me to the Breen Code era! Between 1934 to 1954, the Breen Code
served as a set of guidelines for film-makers. These guidelines addressed the
dos and don’ts of movie-making based on a series of morals. Within that period
of time, Hollywood gave their audience films that have stood the test of time
and even become “classics”. But will this statement hold true for For Me and
My Gal? Keeping reading my review to find out!
Things I liked about the film:
The on-screen chemistry: Since I chose to review this movie
for the Third Judy Garland Blogathon, I want to discuss Judy’s performance in For
Me and My Gal. However, I want to talk about her performance in relation to
her on-screen chemistry with Gene Kelly. When a movie musical features a
romantic relationship, the on-screen chemistry of the lead actor and actress
can sell the idea their characters truly love one another. This is what Gene
and Judy achieved through their portrayals of Harry Palmer and Jo Hayden! One
perfect example is presented during the musical number, “For Me and My Gal”.
Through facial expressions, the choreography, and their singing abilities, Jo
and Harry realize they share the same dream, despite being complete strangers
only hours ago. This musical number emphasizes how these characters were always
meant to be together.
How World War I was incorporated: For Me and My Gal takes place in the middle of the 1900s, the time when World War I took place. The story revolves around civilian perspectives; vaudeville
performers trying to make their dreams come true. At the beginning of the
movie, newspaper headlines broadcast events related to World War I. But the
newspaper’s front page is turned away from the characters, as they are more
concerned with how their performances were reviewed by the critics. As the
story progresses, World War I starts to take center stage in their lives,
affecting each character differently. This progression is steady and the
changes happen more subtly. The way World War I was incorporated into For Me
and My Gal felt realistic. Though fictional musical movies require a
certain amount of disbelief to be suspended, it was refreshing for realism to
be woven into the film.
A story with stakes: Movie musicals, especially those from
the Breen Code era, contain simpler stories. These stories range from looking
for another member of a talent group or characters expressing their love for
each other. In For Me and My Gal, the overarching
story focuses on characters working toward their dreams. Throughout the movie,
Jo and Harry experience obstacles and attempt to overcome them. At one point in
the film, Harry receives an offer to perform at The Palace, a theatre in New
York every vaudeville performer aspires to go. While the offer itself sounds
amazing, the problem is Harry would no longer be able to perform with Jo. This
is one example of For Me and My Gal containing a story with stakes. In
the case of the aforementioned conflict, there were stakes not only for Harry’s
career, but also for his relationship with Jo.
What I didn’t like about the film:
The “insta-love” trope: In stories where a romantic
relationship in included, part of the story is devoted to showcasing the
progression of that relationship. If a story’s relationship moves too quickly,
it may be difficult for the audience to become invested in that relationship or
determine if the actors have on-screen chemistry. While Judy Garland and Gene
Kelly had good on-screen chemistry, I found their characters’ initial attraction
to happen too quickly. In fact, this attraction happened so quickly, it almost
felt unbelievable. I recognize there’s only so much story to tell in an hour
and forty-four minutes. However, I wish Harry and Jo’s attraction for one
another had taken its time.
An unresolved debt: Toward the beginning of For Me and My
Gal, Jo’s brother, Danny, pays Jo a visit after one of her shows. During
their conversation, Jo tells Danny she will pay him back after she becomes a
big vaudeville star. But this is the only time throughout the movie where this
debt is mentioned. The debt is not revisited or resolved as the story progresses.
That part of the story ended up becoming a loose end that was left behind by
the end of the movie.
A confusing conflict: For this part of my review, I will
spoil For Me and My Gal. If you have not seen this movie and are
interested in watching it, skip this part of my review and continue reading where
it says “My overall impression”.
After Jo and Harry discover their love for each other, they
receive a telegram congratulating them on their upcoming performance at The
Palace, a theatre in New York they have dreamed about for so long. When they
arrive at The Palace, Harry and Jo learn there was a misunderstanding. They
received a gig at The Palace theatre in Newark, New Jersey. In the telegram, its
sender stated The Palace was in New York. But any performer on the vaudeville
scene would know there’s only one Palace theatre, the one in New York City.
That quote in the telegram references how Eve Minard, a singer Jo and Harry met
on a train trip, brought up the idea of more than one Palace theatre. For Me
and My Gal was released during the Breen Code era. When a character makes a
poor choice within a film from this time period, they either face accountability
for that choice or learn from their mistake. However, Eve is never confronted
about the telegram. This leaves me confused, wondering if Eve was intentionally
ruining Harry and Jo’s plans or if she was genuinely trying to help, but her
message became lost in translation?
My overall impression:
The term, “The Golden Age of Hollywood”, gets thrown around
from time to time in conversations about the film industry. This term’s
definition depends on who you ask, as film itself can be subjective. In my
opinion, one of Hollywood’s “golden ages” was the Breen Code era. For Me and My Gal serves as one example to prove my point. The 1942 picture sets itself apart from other musical films by
presenting a story with stakes. It also incorporates World War I in a realistic
way. As I’ve stated in past reviews, the strength of a musical movie lies in
its musical numbers. For the most part, For Me and My Gal features
musical numbers that are pleasant to watch! This is the second Judy Garland
production I reviewed this year I was not only recommended, but ended up liking
as well. The streak of enjoyable Judy Garland movies I mentioned in this review’s
introduction is still going strong!
Overall score: 7.6 out of 10
Have you seen For Me and My Gal? What is your
favorite movie of Judy Garland’s? Please let me know in the comment section!
Have fun at the movies!
Sally Silverscreen
You probably saw the title of this review, read the film’s synopsis on IMDB, and wonder, “What does this made-for-TV movie from the ‘80s have to do with the subject of neighbors”? What if I asked you to think about the subject of neighbors from Mr. Rogers’ perspective? On the television show, Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood, the opening theme song was “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?” The show’s overarching theme of neighbors is more about community and a sense of belonging to it. With this perspective in mind, the 1988 made-for-TV production, Dance ‘Til Dawn, fits this definition of neighbors. The story revolves around students and their families belonging to the community of Hoover High School. Most of the movie focuses on Hoover High School’s Senior Prom, showing different points of view throughout the event. Whenever I participate in a blogathon, I try to approach a given topic from a more unique perspective. With Dance ‘Til Dawn reviewed for The Neighbors Blogathon, hosted by Rebecca from Taking Up Room and Quiggy from The Midnite Drive-In, my entry will definitely show a different side to the subject of neighbors!
Things I liked about the film:
The cast’s adaptability: One of the selling points of Dance ‘Til Dawn is the gathering of actors and actresses from television shows that were popular around the movie’s premiere. While television stars are used to working alongside a large group of talent, they grow accustomed to working with their cast from their respective show. They even become familiar with the character they portray, especially if a television show develops a long lifespan. In Dance ‘Til Dawn, the cast was not only given new material to work with, they also had to portray characters that were different from those they were used to. Alan Thicke and Tracey Gold represent everything I’ve been saying. Both actors starred as father and daughter on the sitcom, Growing Pains. Alan Thicke graced television screens as a kind yet fair soul who tried to set a good example for his children. Meanwhile, Tracey’s character, Carol, had a friendly personality (from what I remember), a good candidate for her high school’s welcoming committee. Though Tracey and Alan starred in the same film, they shared very few scenes together. Alan portrayed Dan’s father, Jack, an extroverted, over-confident man who wants his son to be just like him. Tracey portrayed Angela, a young lady who was more introverted and had little confidence to stand up for her dreams. Through Alan’s and Tracey’s performance, as well as the performances from the rest of the cast, every actor and actress sold the illusion of how this talent was always meant to work together. They also sold the idea these characters were always meant to co-exist.
The costume design: A school’s prom provides an excuse for students to dress up in fancy attire and partake in glamour. This is no different for the characters in Dance ‘Til Dawn. The film’s costume designer was Taryn De Chellis and Gingiss FormalWear provided the movie’s prom attire. In collaboration with Patricia Wolfe (the movie’s costume supervisor) and Steve Hicke (the movie’s costumer), the Hoover High School prom attendants looked photogenic in their formal outfits. This was achieved by providing the cast with formalwear that complimented their natural features. Out of the actors portraying high school students, Christina Applegate was the only blonde actress. Wearing an off-the-shoulder gown in a shade that appears to be metallic cherry red, Christina’s blonde hair presents a nice contrast with the bold hue of her character’s prom dress. Though Tracey Gold and Alyssa Milano are brunettes, Tracey’s hair looks a shade lighter than Alyssa’s hair. Similar to Christina receiving a dress in a darker shade, Tracey wore a stunning black, sparkly, sleeveless gown. Meanwhile, Alyssa was given a strapless white dress, paired with white satin pump heels and a pink hair bow.
Different ways of celebrating Prom: In films about Prom, so much focus is given to the party itself that one of two things happen; either prom alternatives are not presented or prom alternatives are frowned upon. But that was not the case in Dance ‘Til Dawn. While Hoover High School’s Prom party was highlighted throughout the story, not every student chooses to celebrate Prom this way. Angela’s original plan was to host a sleepover with her friend, Margaret, spending all night watching movies. No one criticizes or questions Margaret and Angela for wanting to commemorate Prom in this fashion. In fact, the film’s script celebrates the uniqueness of prom festivities. The idea of Prom being what you make it is rarely found in stories about this event, so I appreciate Dance ‘Til Dawn’s creative team making this one of the movie’s themes!
What I didn’t like about the film:
Some cliched stories: Throughout Dance ‘Til Dawn, creative ideas were expressed, from the aforementioned uniqueness of prom festivities to several pieces of dialogue. However, there were some stories within the movie that were cliched. One example is Angela and Kevin’s story. Angela is asked to Prom by Kevin, who wants to date her for the wrong reasons. Before arriving at the prom party, Angela transforms from an introverted “geek” to a beautiful young lady worthy of being prom royalty. Attending an event under false pretenses, as well as a My Fair Lady-esque makeover, have become so common in stories about teenagers, they are cliches at this point. Personally, I wish Angela and/or Kevin’s story had taken a different route. A more unique story option would be having Angela asking an Italian exchange student to Prom, developing a friendship and a shared interest in Italian art.
The underutilization of Tempestt Bledsoe: As I mentioned earlier in this review, Angela originally plans to host a sleepover with her friend, Margaret. Portrayed by Tempestt Bledsoe, Margaret was a character with her own style and not afraid to speak her mind. But compared to the other characters, Margaret appeared in only a handful of scenes. In fact, Margaret wasn’t given much to do in this story. Not only was Margaret an underutilized character, Tempestt’s acting talents were underutilized as well. Like I said about Angela and Kevin’s story, I wish Margaret’s story had been a bit more creative. An example would be Angela daring Margaret to go to Prom, with Margaret having a better time than she expected.
Some things that don’t make sense: There were a few times in Dance ‘Til Dawn where things don’t make sense. A good example takes place in Shelley and Dan’s story. Because Shelley lacks a date for Prom, she spends most of the evening trying to avoid people from Hoover High School to prevent embarrassment. While in the drive-thru of a fast-food restaurant, Shelley recognizes the voice on the other end of the drive-thru menu; a student whose locker is next to Shelley’s. What didn’t make sense to me was how Shelley and Dan did not realize how close they were to the menu’s microphone, meaning the student on the other end would recognize Shelley’s voice. Maybe the screenwriters forgot how drive-thru menus worked?
My overall impression:
Throughout this review, I’ve been using Dance ‘Til Dawn to elaborate on Mister Rogers’ perspective on neighbors. Learning more about the production after watching the movie, I realized some of the cast members would be considered neighbors, as their shows aired on the same network. With stars from other networks joining the aforementioned cast members, the group as a whole provides a blend of talents, personalities, and perspectives. The film’s behind-the-camera team also adds to this blend of people. When they came together, they created a made-for-TV film that, in my opinion, was just ok. The movie didn’t go above and beyond enough to be considered good or great. But at the same time, it wasn’t offensive enough to be bad or even disappointing. The on-camera talent worked together to sell the illusion that they were always meant to act together and their characters were always meant to co-exist. The behind-the-camera team, such as the costume department, collaborated to make the movie look photogenic and feel cohesive. Looking back on Dance ‘Til Dawn, I wonder why there was never a film about the Disneyland attraction, Videopolis. In fact, the prom party in the 1988 film made me think about that place in Disneyland. Now that I completed this review, I guess I have a new mystery to solve!
Overall score: 6 out of 10
Have you seen Dance ‘Til Dawn? Are there any stars you wish had appeared in the movie? Please let me know in the comment section!
Have fun at the movies!
Sally Silverscreen
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!
I was intrigued to review Amadeus for a number of reasons. One of those reasons was the song, “Rock Me Amadeus” by Falco. For years, I thought the song was created to promote the movie, given the coincidence of two pieces of Amadeus related media debuting in the ‘80s. With the song released in 1985, a month before Amadeus won Best Picture at the 57th Academy Awards, I’d like to believe I was kind of right. In At The Movies’ ‘Best of 1984’ episode, both Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert liked the glamourous, musical biopic. Roger made the film his “personal choice for the best film of 1984”. Like Network and Harry & Son, I had never seen Amadeus, so I approached the movie with little to no expectations. Though I heard good things about the picture since its premiere in 1984. As I write this review after watching the movie, I can definitely see why Amadeus was, at least, nominated for an Oscar.
When I reviewed RKO 281 last July, I complimented Liev Schreiber’s portrayal of Orson Welles. In that review, I said Liev brought humanity back to Orson’s name, finding the heart of the “genius” and putting some genuine emotion behind it. This is the same way I felt while witnessing Tom Hulce’s portrayal of the titular man. Reading about an iconic figure like Amadeus can make one wonder what his personality was like. Similar to Orson Welles, Amadeus can be thought of as more than just a man with a gift. Through good times and bad times, Tom shows the film’s audience how Amadeus was, simply, human. As his father comes to visit him in Vienna, Amadeus expresses pure joy when he sees his father at the top of the stairs. Amadeus’ smile alone showcases the happiness within his heart. One evening, when Amadeus is composing an opera, he slowly slips into exhaustion. His eyelids rise and fall, he sways out of rhythm, and his face looks as white as the lace on his shirt. Roger claimed Tom’s portrayal of Amadeus was “one of the year’s most engaging performances”. Tom’s performance serves as an example where Roger, the Academy, and I were on the same page.
F. Murray Abraham’s portrayal of Antonio Salieri reminded me of Gloria Swanson’s portrayal of Norma Desmond in Sunset Boulevard. What I mean by this is the character in question’s search for fame is so strong, it forces the character to become increasingly obsessive, even making questionable choices. Throughout Amadeus, Antonio reflects on his life and how it was impacted by the success of Amadeus. At the beginning of his story, wistfulness can sometimes be heard in Antonio’s voice as he shares his dream of making music for God. As his reflected encounters with Amadeus continue, the tone in Antonio’s voice evolves into bitterness, hinting at the frustration he bottled up over the years. This frustration can also be seen if one looks closely at Antonio’s facial expressions. Before a scene from the movie was shared in the ‘Best of 1984’ episode, Roger called F. Murray’s portrayal “a brilliant performance”. The Academy certainly agreed with Roger, as F. Murray won the Best Actor Oscar instead of Tom at 1985’s Academy Awards. Personally, I liked both F. Murray’s and Tom’s performance for various reasons. Through their portrayals, Tom and F. Murray displayed how fame can negatively impact the human soul.
As I mentioned in this review’s introduction, Roger chose Amadeus as his “personal choice for the best film of 1984”. One reason why is how “this movie doesn’t contain one bit of the pretentious, solemnity that we usually associate with movie biographies of classical musicians”. To add to Roger’s comment, I’d like to point out how the film serves as an immersive, detail-oriented character study of how the music industry can be both rewarding and cruel. When Antonio shares his life story with a visiting priest, he emphasizes how he was the only member of his family who was interested in music. This organic talent and rise to prominence provide an opposite view of how Amadeus claimed his fame. Scenes and dialogue illustrate how Amadeus was raised to be a star, with his father providing both the music education and connections for a comfortable future. While discussing a new opera with the Emperor, Amadeus successfully argues why his opera should be performed. He states how he worked many hours on the project and how the opera’s lack of politics will prevent the audience from being alienated. The examples I provided in this paragraph show how, sometimes, talent isn’t enough when it comes to the music industry. It also highlights the effort that goes into making music, let alone one song.
While sharing his thoughts on Amadeus, Roger stated how the film was “a cheerful, rambunctious, irreverent film”. I disagree with his statement to an extent. There are cheerful moments within the movie. However, I wouldn’t claim the movie itself is “cheerful”. The overall story contains darker, sadder moments as well, especially toward the end of Amadeus’ life. One part of the story revolves around someone masquerading as a deceased loved one Amadeus knows. Due to his grief and unresolved issues, Amadeus truly believes the masquerading imposter is the loved one brought back from the dead. This imposter is so cruel to use Amadeus’ pain for their own personal gain. Another statement of Roger’s I disagree with is about how the movie views Amadeus himself. Roger claims how the film “doesn’t so much concern with the actual details of Mozart’s life as with its own feelings about his genius, his personality”. The movie allows the characters, including Amadeus, to be flawed. But there were a few instances where the story seemed one sided. After a successful opera performance, Antonio’s student is upset because she learned Amadeus was engaged to a woman named Constanze. This leads Antonio to believe Amadeus and the student had a relationship. However, the story never clarifies if Antonio’s belief was true. In fact, Antonio stated he didn’t know how his student and Amadeus met or how long they knew each other. To me, this goes against what a cinematic biography should do; introducing an audience to a historical figure through an unopinionated lens.
Before moving on to the next featured film in At The Movies’ ‘Best of 1984’ episode, Once Upon A Time in America, Gene tells Roger “what I love about the film is that it celebrates creativity and that is a subject that most Hollywood movies are simply not concerned with”. As I was about to disagree with Gene by bringing up RKO 281, I remembered that a) RKO 281 was an HBO made-for-TV movie and b) RKO 281 was released in 1999, a decade after Amadeus. But this review is not debating how much creativity is incorporated into Hollywood’s films, especially during the mid-80s. This article is simply an exploration of whether I agree or disagree with Roger and Gene’s thoughts on Amadeus. Earlier in this review, I mentioned how the film was an immersive, detail-oriented character study of how the music industry can be both rewarding and cruel. The movie’s immersion and focus on detail can be seen in the production’s costume and set design. These elements make the entire picture look and feel historically accurate. While Amadeus is a beautiful looking film, it also contains substance. The script provides thought-provoking material, exploring themes like how success can affect someone both positively and negatively. The glamourous and not-so-glamourous sides of the music industry are shown through the stories of both Amadeus and Antonio. Like I previously brought up in this review, Amadeus successfully argued why his opera should be performed. With everything I said, it makes me wonder how much Falco argued in favor of his song, “Rock Me Amadeus”?
This review was brought to you by
Sally Silverscreen
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!
Toward the end of At The Movies’ ‘Stinkers of 1984’ episode, Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert share a collection of films they felt were some of the worst movies of 1984. One of the films Roger brought up was Harry & Son. In a brief segment about the movie, Roger refers to the picture as a “sincere, but misguided dream”. Roger also calls Harry & Son “a painfully contrived tear-jerker”. Gene responds before the segment ends that “he and Burt Reynolds are two of the worst in ‘84”, likely referring to Paul Newman. I honestly hadn’t heard of this film until I watched this episode of At The Movies. Therefore, I approached the title with little to no expectations. But now that I have seen Harry & Son, I think calling the picture one of the worst of 1984 is, actually, a bit harsh.
While briefly talking about Harry & Son, Roger brings up Robby Benson. But instead of simply referring to Robby by his name, Roger says “Robby “gee Dad, want a diet pop” Benson”, even saying it in a mocking tone. By addressing Robby’s name in this way, Roger gives the impression Robby’s character, Howard “Howie” Keach, is just a stereotypical surfer jock. As I got to know this character while watching Harry & Son, I discovered this assumption was far from the truth. Throughout the story, Howie always has his heart in the right place. More often than not, he brings a burst of positivity, choosing to look at the glass half full. In a scene where Howie and his father, Harry, are on their porch, Harry orders his son to find a job, a bitter tone in his voice due to his frustrations over his declining health. In a positive, yet matter-of-fact way, Howie informs his dad how he already has a job washing cars. Another scene shows Howie coming home, excited to see his dad arrive so early from work. A big smile is spread across his face and his eyes shine bright with joy. But as he learns his dad has just lost his job, Howie’s face changes to display confusion and fear. This change in persona is seamless, never missing an emotional beat. Moments like this one were made possible by Robby’s acting abilities, showcasing a wide range of emotions and expressions. In my opinion, I think Robby should have, at least, been nominated for his performance in Harry & Son.
As I just mentioned in the previous paragraph, Harry is frustrated over his declining health. After an incident at a construction site, Harry is forced to be honest about his poor eyesight. One scene has Harry talking with one of his co-workers about his health issues, raising concerns over how these issues will affect his employment. In the 21st century, specifically the 2020s, there has been a risen awareness for men to address their medical issues. So, for Harry to talk to a peer about his health in a movie from the ‘80s is kind of ahead of its time. Later in the story, Howie learns his friend doesn’t have health insurance. When he takes his friend to the hospital, Howie is frustrated by the rejection his friend faces due to the hospital’s policies. The importance of health insurance is another medical topic that has gained attention in the 21st century, including the 2020s. Similar to what I said about Harry’s honesty about his health, I appreciate these brief, yet necessary moments to bring up these serious health subjects, especially in a time when they weren’t found in common societal conversations yet.
In the introduction of my review, I quoted Roger Ebert’s statements about Harry & Son, with Roger saying the film was a “sincere, but misguided dream” and “a painfully contrived tear-jerker”. I will agree with Roger about the movie being sincere. There were some sweet moments that were written, acted, and directed with a strong amount of sincerity. One example is when Howie goes to a high-end clothing store to purchase a suit jacket. When I first saw that scene, I honestly thought Howie had bought the jacket for himself, showing his dad how he can afford nicer attire. So, imagine my shock when Howie gave the jacket to his dad as a birthday present.
Where Roger and I disagree is how the movie is a “misguided dream” and a “painfully contrived tear-jerker”. I will admit Harry & Son has its flaws, such as scenes ending too quickly and emphasizing showing without telling. But I wouldn’t go so far as to say the movie is “misguided” or “painfully contrived”. With scenes ending too quickly, it felt like the characters were expected to say more. When Nina (Harry’s daughter and Howie’s sister) is talking with a client at a hair salon, I thought Nina was going to respond to the client’s story about their estranged father. But the moment is quickly forgotten as the story moves on. As Howie is reconnecting with Katie, an ex-girlfriend, their conversation is one of the most cryptic pieces of dialogue I’ve ever heard in a movie. While I could see these characters still cared for one another, by observing their expressions and displayed emotions, it took me a few minutes to figure out what Katie and Howie were saying to each other. This is just one example of showing without telling.
Gene added his thought on Harry & Son, stating “he and Burt Reynolds are two of the worst in ‘84”, as he possibly referred to Paul Newman. Since I haven’t seen many of Paul’s or Burt’s films, I can’t agree or disagree with Gene’s statement. But what I can do is share my overall thoughts on Harry & Son. This is an ok, slice of life story, which, in my opinion, would have worked better as a stage play. My reason is how the cast is smaller and the story seems more condensed. While I liked the acting performances in this film, Robby Benson ended up being the star of the show. If anyone has an interest in watching Harry & Son, I’d recommend the film for Robby’s performance alone. With the flaws I already mentioned, I also felt like there was too much happening in a short amount of time. However, the story itself was easier to understand. Harry & Son will not become one of the best movies I’ve seen this year, so far. But compared to some of the films I’ve, so far, seen, there are far worse titles than Harry & Son.
This review was brought to you by
Sally Silverscreen
When I signed up for the It’s In The Name of The Title Blogathon, one of the movies I chose to review was Harry & Son starring Robby Benson. When I think of Robby, I think of how he voiced Beast in the 1991 animated film, Beauty and the Beast. Remembering how Angela Lansbury also starred in that film, I always thought it was a missed opportunity for Murder, She Wrote to not promote the 1991 movie, especially since the show was still a popular program at the time. This led me to realize Angela and Robby have another thing in common; they both starred in a project released in 1984. In Angela’s case, that program was Murder, She Wrote! In honor of the show’s 40th anniversary, I’m hosting Cabot Cove-thon! Because Murder, She Wrote is a multifaceted program, there are many ideas for blogathon participants to choose from. Here is a list of possible subjects:
If you’re interested in joining Cabot Cove-thon and found an idea you’re interested in writing about, please read the official rules before signing up for the event.
— Sally from 18 Cinema Lane — Editorial about Why Universal Orlando Resort Should Host Murder, She Wrote Weekend, Review of Murder, She Wrote: Dying to Retire by Jessica Fletcher and Donald Bain
— Kristen from Hoofers and Honeys — Review of The Harvey Girls (1946)
— Rebecca from Taking Up Room — Review of Death on the Nile (1978)
18 Cinema Lane 