|
Post by timothylane on Mar 26, 2020 8:10:33 GMT -8
In Hector Bywater's The Great Pacific War, Japan gets things started by sending a freighter to blow itself up in the Panama Canal, knocking out at least one lock and thus deactivating the canal until the lock can be repaired or replaced. No particular intrigues on board, though.
Richard Armour's It All Started With Columbus has a photo of a short mob boss escorted by a pair of hulking bodyguards captioned "One Big Shot and Two Little Shots".
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Mar 26, 2020 9:17:57 GMT -8
Given how the Brits knocked out that one yuge dry-dock door in France in the St Nazaire Raid, the Japs could have caused a lot of trouble if they could have disabled the Panama Canal. But given that it's unlikely any of the technology involved in the locks and gates was particularly difficult to reproduce or fix (unlike the difficult-to-reproduce monster dock gate at St Nazaire), it would likely have been a quite temporary inconvenience.
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Mar 26, 2020 9:51:55 GMT -8
In the book, the Japanese followed up by intercepting the US Atlantic Fleet as it traversed the Strait of Magellan using a couple of long-range submarines.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Mar 26, 2020 10:35:19 GMT -8
In the movie, the Fat Man was trying to buy military information about the canal's defenses from Bogie. In the end, their plan was to drop a bomb on one of the lock gates. I think as the dam-busters found, that is much easier said than done. The Brits had to work very hard to come up with a solution. It was about far more than just strapping a bomb onto the undercarriage of a plane.
Anyway, Bogies saves the day, although at the end we see a large overflight of U.S. planes, so we can assume that if Bogie hadn't machine-gunned it on the runway that it would have quickly been shot down. I guess. Sort of a hack job here and there on the plot.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Mar 27, 2020 7:55:20 GMT -8
More Kung Fu Flu Films: Singapore. I don’t care how many times Mr. Kung as been to the Orient, I’m not sure he’s going to get much out of this film. Despite supposedly being set in Singapore, this is surely “Singapore studio Hollywood backlot” except for some fly-over stock footage at the start of the film. These are the types of films, I swear, we could do better writing in a half-hour brain-storming session. This is stock Hollywood shlock that shows minimal effort on all parts, including the actors. But I stayed with it just to see. Thankfully it’s only 79 minutes long which helped. Fred MacMurray plays a diamond smuggler, Matt Gordon. He meets Ava Gardner pre-war. Loses her mid-war. Finds her again after-war. Ava Gardner is a complete bore in this. I confess I haven’t seen a lot of Ava Gardner films but her beauty alone can’t disguise the fact that, at least in this one, she can’t act a lick. All she does in this one is speak softly and try to look like either a wounded dove or a love-struck doormat. MacMurray is all wrong for this as well. But with the lame plot, no actor could have fixed this one. The whole movie is based on Matt Gordon coming back after the war and trying to recover the $250,000 worth of pearls he had stashed in his hotel room. He could have grabbed them at any time but they string this along for no particular reason. In the meantime, this familiar hotel where he met Linda Grahame (Ava Gardner) brings back all kinds of memories. We get a flashback early on in this film and I confess I got a little lost. Gordon is saying goodbye to Grahame as she leaves on a boat. Because the Japanese are on the way? That’s what I thought at the time. But then later she is apparently killed as Gordon and Grahame are running around the city as it is being bombed. Admittedly, I missed something or misinterpreted something. But I couldn’t help at the time seeing the opening flashback as a gratuitous flashback. Anyway, to lower the film’s IQ further, it turns out the Linda Grahame wasn’t killed in the Jap bombing of Singapore. Gordon discovers her post-war in the hotel the two of them used to frequent. She’s now married to another man and doesn’t remember him or her own past. The IQ slips further when the police inspector pretty much lets MacMurray go, recognizes that he is in love with Grahame, and even his MacMurray’s plane returned to the airfield when Grahame shows up, having suddenly recovered her memory and realizing she is in love with Gordon. Of course, Grahame’s current husband is understanding. It’s a mess. I'm sure the real city is much more interesting and charming, but you won't find that here.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Mar 27, 2020 9:15:24 GMT -8
I think you could plot out a story right here and now better than this one. I'll play the role of the British cop. You can play the MacMurray role. Gibbnonymous can play Ava Gardner.
Really, first and foremost in a film such as this is to capture the exotic aspect of the locale which is, or should be, one of the primary stars of the film. They didn't even attempt to do that.
I realize that Casablanca was not (I believe) filmed in Casablanca but on a studio back lot. They spent most of the time on interior shots. I think other film makers thought they could do the same thing not realizing that Casablanca was set in Casablanca but was not about Casablanca, per se.
In Singapore, it is (or should be) much more about the place. And for a story based on smuggling pearls, we see not one pearl diver or any locations shot (or even fake studio shot) such as that. It was is if the film itself was a Democrat talking-point as opposed to the real thing.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Mar 30, 2020 11:19:03 GMT -8
I’m not specifically looking for a film so that Mr. Flu Manchu can relive old times. But I ran across 1949’s Malaya with Spencer Tracy, James Stewart, and Sydney Greenstreet. What could go wrong? Just about everything. This is perfunctory movie, at best. They were going through the motions. Nothing made sense. During WWII, the U.S. government agrees to go along with a plan hatched by a journalist, John Royer (Jimmy Stewart), to smuggle all (or most) of the hidden rubber that is said to exist deep in the jungles, hidden from the Japanese occupiers of British Malaya. Somehow Royer and Carnahan (Spencer Tracy) would almost single-handedly coordinate all this under the nose of the Japanese. The U.S. would also bring a gigantic freighter to haul away the rubber (as well as bringing $1,000,000 in gold to pay for it). I can see a small commando raid going in and maybe stealing a couple coconuts. But a project this size, led by a journalist, deep inside Japanese-controlled territory seems ludicrous. And even if they brought that rubber back with them in the one ship, wouldn’t that just be a drop in the bucket? But this film treats it like it would be a major breakthrough. This is really awful from start to finish but I stayed with it. First off, there was no reason for Jimmy Stewart to even be in this. Spencer Tracy would have been enough. It makes no sense to have both. It’s a great example of completely amateurish film making. The script is a mess of inconsistencies and things that don’t make sense. Never does this become even a heist film, which it could have been at the very least. I’m not sure what it is even after watching it. One reviewer says it all: The search continues for a film set in southern Asia that doesn’t suck.
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Mar 30, 2020 12:23:00 GMT -8
Good thing the Japanese never noticed that large American freighter in Japanese-controlled waters.
Incidentally, The Bridge on the River Kwai is set in southeast Asia. It"s loosely based on the construction of the Burma-Siam railway, though I've read that it may not actually have crossed the Kwai River. (Pierre Boulle, who wrote the original novel, noted the proximity and assumed it crossed somewhere. Any bridge would have done equally well.)
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Mar 30, 2020 12:47:42 GMT -8
Yes. But it was very well camouflaged. Oh, brother.
Yes, The Bridge on the River Kwai would be the kind of film I'm looking for...or even half as good. Malaya was on the about-as-good scale as the regular flu morality rate: 0.1% as good.
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Mar 30, 2020 14:04:23 GMT -8
I checked the wikipedia entry on Malaya, and it said that the movie was based on an idea someone had for getting rubber (which was in very short supply until we got synthetic rubber production ramped up) from Malaya. In that case, they probably wanted to smuggle it out using large submarines, a workable notion. Germany and Italy traded with Japan that way, and a similar concept was used in a Frank Herbert novel variously titled 21st Century Sub, Under Pressure, and The Dragon in the Sea.
I also noticed that DeForest Kelley was in it, though evidently a minor role. Still, how often (if ever) has anyone seen him as anyone other than Dr. Leonard J. McCoy? You could say much the same for James Doohan. Shatner and Nimoy had extensive non-Trek careers (including appearing together 0n The Man From UNCLE in "The Project Strigas Affair"). I've even seen George Tacky and Walter Koenig on other shows, if rarely.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Mar 30, 2020 14:15:01 GMT -8
You’d need a bean counter to do the math. But I wonder if you could load enough raw rubber into a submarine to cover the cost of gas just getting there and, not to mention the cost of taking a sub off the front line which could be sinking tens of thousands of tons of enemy shipping.
Much better would be a commando raid to smuggle some Malayan scientist who had perfected a synthetic rubber formula or something like that. At least that would be believable.
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Mar 30, 2020 14:40:38 GMT -8
Actually, synthetic rubber (buna) was produced by I. G. Farben in Germany. Since many of their chemists were (unsurprisingly) Jews, they found themselves kicked out of their own cartel during the 30s (among the subsidiary firms of I. G. Farben were Bayer and BASF, incidentally) and considered it advisable to leave Germany before things got worse. (One of those fleeing was Fritz Haber, whose development of synthetic nitrates -- the Haber process -- saved Germany's bacon in the Great War. That cut him no slack with the Nazis. The British weren't too thrilled to see him because he also was involved in developing poison gas.) So they probably did have some available, but it took time to get production started. Until early 1942, no one could imagine needing it.)
When you don't have something, you don't worry so much about the cost of smuggling via submarines. The trade between the Italians and Germans on the one hand and Japan on the other involved modest quantities of strategic goods from Japan in return for German technology. The Axis needed only small quantities of natural rubber (which apparently was involved in the production of buna). They also needed tin (there was tungsten available from Spain and Portugal).
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Mar 30, 2020 15:11:57 GMT -8
Some of those U-boats made it both ways, providing Germany with needed supplies. They had some large U-boats, as did Italy, some of which were in fact supply boats. (The Germans used them to supply regular submarines at sea to keep them active longer.) The US, as far as I know, had no non-combat submarines, though the quality of US torpedoes for the first couple of years made their use somewhat limited. (The Germans had the same problem, much of it caused by the difficult conditions their U-boats operated under. They finally fixed them by copying torpedoes from a captured British U-boat -- the Seal, I think.)
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Apr 8, 2020 10:04:22 GMT -8
This next one up is not a film noir. In fact, it’s a bit of a dorky film. But at 67 minutes, it can provide a nice diversion in your own personal CoronaZone. In A Stranger in Town, Frank Morgan plays a judge who goes on vacation in the small town of Crown Port. He runs smack dab into corrupt local politics and a man who is running for mayor to oppose this corruption. The judge’s harsh, man-hating legal assistant also follows him down with some important papers for him to look over. She’s a fox despite the harsh disposition. The young man running for mayor against the incumbent is a yokel, but sort of sincere, naive, and attractive to the bitchy woman in his own way. Will the current corrupt mayor and his cohorts be ousted? Will the young Mr. Smith Goes to Crown Port (although he was already there) succeed in his anti-corruption bid? Will the legal secretary stand down from being a ball-buster and maybe even show some warmth? And will this judge (who remains incognito in regards to him being a judge) be able to provide enough mentorship to the young Mr. Smith in order for him to succeed? Or will he have to pull out some heavy guns of his own? Don’t expect too much, and you could be mildly entertained. Frank Morgan, of course, is the man who played the Wizard of Oz. I’m not familiar with any of the other actors in this one. You can catch it on Amazon Prime Video. A reviewer suggests that a good follow-up to this movie is 1950’s The Magnificent Yankee, a story about Oliver Wendell Holmes.
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Apr 8, 2020 10:55:34 GMT -8
I thought I recognized Carlson and checked up on him. He was in a few monster movies, including the main hero in The Creature from the Black Lagoon.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Apr 8, 2020 15:34:23 GMT -8
Aha. Now that you mentioned in. That does ring a bell regarding The Creature from the African-American Lagoon.
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Apr 8, 2020 15:52:14 GMT -8
I might not have remembered the name, except that I saw the movie fairly recently on TCM. He was also the star of It Came From Outer Space, which I think I saw long ago, and in a pair of 50s series (I Led Three Lives and Mackenzie's Raiders) that I don't recall ever seeing (or in the second case even hearing of previously).
Needless to say, I got these roles from IMDB.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Apr 10, 2020 7:18:20 GMT -8
Grab a beer, a slice of pizza, and find a friend who enjoys bad movies because 1944’s Dark Mountain is clearly one of these. (It's currently playing on Amazon Prime Video.) Robert Lowery plays what is surely the stupidest fire ranger ever to appear on film, Ranger Don Bradley. His stupidity and cluelessness are matched only by the sheer helplessness and bad judgment of the girl he pines for, Kay Downey (played by Ellen Drew). Ranger Don Bradley plays the awe-shucks nice-guy who loves Kay and plans to marry her. When he finally gets set up in his career, he goes to Miss Bad Judge of Characters and asks for her hand. But in the meantime she’s married a murdering gangster about whom she has no clue. But she sure likes her fur coats. (She’s shocked, shocked to find out he is a racketeer.) Her husband, Steven Downey (Regis Toomey) is ultimately too unlikable to root for him in this bad movie. Luckily there is a dog and some dynamite that comes to the rescue in the end. And you also have fellow dim-witted ranger, Willie Dinsmire, who is so awe-shucks wholesome, nice, and funny you just want to slap him. He plays checkers with the station dog, for instance. Why is this rather extended sequence stuck in the middle of what wants to be a Film Noir? Your guess is as good as mine. In the end, he does show he has some brains (although I'm not sure if he won the game against the dog). Elisha Cook Jr. appears briefly as one of Steve Downey’s crooked underlings. He doesn’t last long in this which has to have been a real plus for Elisha Cook Jr. and his career. This is bad enough to be watchable. But only if you can sit around and trade jokes with a friend. When there are even scare-quotes around the title of the movie as it comes on screen, you know you’re talking about real professional film makers:
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Apr 11, 2020 7:35:07 GMT -8
Let me tell you about a movie that is not quite the worst one I’ve ever watched all the way through. But by far it is the worst heist movie I’ve ever seen. It’s so bad, they don’t actually even complete the heist. Hell Bound features John Russell (mainly an actor in Westerns, I guess…he’s terrible in this) as the mastermind of a heist. Jordan means to steal a quarter million dollars worth of drugs from a Navy hospital ship. This movie is truly bizarre. It starts (interestingly) with a short movie made by Jordan which he is showing to a mobster. He needs this mobster’s money and resource to help put together the heist. This short movie is highly detailed — and actual enactment — of how the heist will go. The plan doesn’t even pass the smell test. Depending on a guy to overdose on insulin so that an ambulance is sent for whereby the nurse (in on the scheme) smuggles the drugs off the boat? Making sure the other accomplice is onboard because he is spotted and picked up at sea (his story being that his boat went down)? Anyway, you know everything is going to go wrong, and it does. But the really odd bit is the strange and confused vibe from the film makers. The movie is called “Hell Bound.” At one point Jordan (the ringleader) introduces himself to someone as “Mr. Natas.” Okay. We get it. Or do we? It's such a cluster-f*** of film making. Maybe that explains the stupidity of the plot. Here you have a movie opening with a plan that is to be so well-coordinated that the mastermind of the plan even made a film to sketch out how it would all go. But then everyone he recruits for his team he bullies and otherwise abuses. (One guy he basically beats the hell out of until he agrees to become part of the plan.) That is how you’re going to have a tightly-run Mission-Impossible-like heist? It’s so incredibly stupid that you become hooked somewhat to see if the ending can be a sort of crescendo of inanity. The strange thing is, the ending is the best part. The idiot, Jordan, is there at the docks waiting to see the culmination of his plan. But things go very wrong. The guy who takes the insulin in order to really be sick (instead of just feigning it) actually dies. This was to provide the excuse for an ambulance being sent for and the drugs being picked up from the sick man’s room and smuggled out. Well...I guess that part still could have worked. They did need an ambulance. The other accomplice on the boat (and this is truly hilarious) is dragged off down the gangplank under arrest. But he was supposed to have taken advantage of a distraction (a fake fire) to steal the drugs and them leave them in the room of the sick guy. But this guy (and we know this even beforehand….the ringleader also knows this beforehand) is already hooked on drugs. And he’s just come down from a high so now he’s itching for more. So instead of going with the plan, he’s so in need of drugs that he runs madly to try to get to the drugs to use them for himself. He’s easily caught. So there you have the ringleader maybe twenty yards away watching the culmination of his plan. He sees the sick guy is not sick but is dead and is being carried off the boat on a stretcher, his body covered by a tarp. The other onboard accomplice is being led away in cuffs by a couple officers from the ship. The ambulance does pull up on time but this aspect was botched as well when Jordan (previously) had knifed the chick who was supposed to play the part of the nurse. Why is he knifing at the last minute members of his highly-coordinated height team? Your guess is as good as mine. Anyway, the chick who replaces her as the nurse basically points out Jordan to the cops at the dock. Thus ensues what is actually an interesting and well-filmed chase seen that mostly happens in a junkyard. It becomes a different (and good) movie from about 7 minutes. This one is so bad I can’t recommend it even for the “so bad it's good” aspect. But if you’re a fan of Film Noir, you could be amused by some of the dumbest and clumsiest dialogue ever put to film. This has “amateur-hour” written all over it and John Russell, in particular, is terrible as the lead. His strange performance may also be the only reason to watch this. Stuart Whitman has a small role as the ambulance driver who is not in on the plan. But he’s part of the two-person crew that includes the nurse who is in on the plan. She’s a babe (she really is) and, of course, they fall in love. This movie can be found on Amazon Prime Video. Please don’t find it. But if you do, let me know what you think of it.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Apr 15, 2020 12:36:27 GMT -8
There is no shortage of bad movies out there. But every once in a while you meet one that finds a whole new way to be bad. In Slightly Scarlet, two hot red-head sisters provide the framework for the drama. One of them is slightly stupid. The other is slightly overacting. The stupid one is dating the good-guy who is running against the rampant corruption. The movie starts with her picking up her bad-redhead sister who just got out of the pen. John Payne plays a character who is all over the board. He’s a bad guy and sometimes not quite as bad guy. For whatever reason (and it made no sense in this, as did little else), the hot redhead who didn’t just get out or prison has the hots for him even while supposedly getting closer to marrying the good-guy running for mayor. The bad hot redhead is a train-wreck. Her character, combined with her over-acting, is at least something to watch. This movie actually started well. But there was one exact moment when it came off the rails and I knew it had come off the rails. That’s somewhat rare. Oh, in retrospect you can often look back and see where a movie went off the rails. But in this one, it was obvious just when that happened. And then the plot became silly and the characters silly putty. No one is good in this, not even Ellen Corby who looks distinctly uncomfortable and uncertain in her role as the good redhead’s maid. Perhaps her front row seat at this train wreck of a movie was the cause of that. Both these redheads are built like the proverbial brick shit-house. But it’s not enough to carry this movie through. But like any train wreck, there is some appeal in watching the cinematic destruction unfold.
|
|