Flick of The Day: 12 Angry Men

It is difficult sometimes to understand the popularity of some films. I'm sure you can think of at least one film that is near universally popular and adored but that you just can't bring yourself to enjoy. Then again, popularity has rarely been an indicator of greatness. If it were then Titanic would be the greatest film of all time, rather then an over-long teen romance punctuated by explosions. That said, to every rule there is an exception and if there is one film that is both well liked and acclaimed then it is today's flick of the day, 12 Angry Men, director Sidney Lumet's classic psychological drama of a deliberating jury.

12 Angry Men

On a sweltering Summer day in a Manhattan courthouse, 12 white males deliberate on a teenage Puerto Rican boy accused of murdering his father. A fantastic ensemble cast of some of the best character actors of the day each bringing their own views, backgrounds, suspicions and prejudices to the table. Martin Balsam, Lee J Cobb, Ed Begley and Jack Warden each give stunning performances as the various jurors. After the first ballot, the vote is 11 to 1 to convict with the sole dissenter being Henry Fonda, Juror Number 8 and the film's conscience. As Fonda persuades the others to re-examine the evidence piece by piece, cracks begin to appear in the case and we learn more about the backgrounds of each of the men. Cobb's Juror Number 3 is a bully with an estranged son, Warden's Juror Number 7 wants to get to a ball game and has a natural mistrust of foreigners. Others are loath to make a wave, some want to blend in but to a man they have not examined the case in their own minds. As Fonda chips away at the case, he brings more jurors to his side as the temperature rises throughout the day until each man draws his final conclusion and a decision is reached.

A landmark film on its release, it has withstood the test of time because it asks fundamental questions of the jury trial system and does so in an entertaining and persuasive manner. Fonda has never been better in his role as the doubting Samaritan but it is a real ensemble piece and some of the best performances come from the lesser known talents. The cross section of society in the characters is well balanced, though this being the 1950's all are white males. 

Juror #3: Everything... every single thing that took place in that courtroom, but I mean everything... says he's guilty. What d'ya think? I'm an idiot or somethin'? Why don't cha take that stuff about the old man; the old man who lived there and heard every thing? Or this business about the knife! What, 'cause we found one exactly like it? The old man SAW him. Right there on the stairs. What's the difference how many seconds it was? Every single thing. The knife falling through a hole in his pocket... you can't PROVE he didn't get to the door! Sure, you can take all the time hobblin' around the room, but you can't PROVE it! And what about this business with the El? And the movies! There's a phony deal if I ever heard one. I betcha five thousand dollars I'd remember the movies I saw! I'm tellin' ya: every thing that's gone on has been twisted... and turned. This business with the glasses. How do you know she didn't have 'em on? This woman testified in open court! And what about hearin' the kid yell... huh? I'm tellin' ya, I've got all the facts here... 

Juror #3: [He struggles with his notebook, throws it on the table. The photo of him with his son is on top] Here... Ah. Well, that's it - that's the whole case! 

[He turns towards the window as the other jurors stare at him] 

Juror #3: Well... say something! You lousy bunch of bleedin' hearts. You're not goin' to intimidate me - I'm entitled to my opinion! 

[He sees the picture of his son on the table] 

Juror #3: Rotten kids... you work your life out! 

[He grabs the picture and tears it to pieces. He suddenly realizes what he's doing] 

Juror #3: [Breaks down] No. Not guilty. Not guilty.

Lumet's real genius as a director here, is how the tension ratchets up as the day progresses. The film opens as a reserved almost up tight piece but as the claustrophobic jury room closes in on the men and the tension begins to mount it opens up into something very special. The camera seems to take a tighter view of the men's faces and oppressive heat takes it toll. Ultimately the tensions reach their natural conclusion and the jurors are forced to confront their own prejudices in the search for the truth. There are some fine set pieces along the way and each actor is given their chance to shine for really this is an actors piece.

Currently sitting at Number 6 on the IMDB Top 250, a position apparently owed to the fact that it is one of the few black and white films that American schoolchildren are exposed to though it is a fine film and worthy of its position. That said, it is a product of its time. As noted, the jury is all white and all male and the cigarette smoke hangs in the humid jury room. 

[last lines] 

Juror #9: Hey... what's your name? 

Juror #8: Davis. 

Juror #9: My name's McCardle. 

[pause] 

Juror #9: Well, so long. 

Juror #8: So long.

12 Angry Men is a interesting compelling film even today and well worth a look. Directed by the legendary Sidney Lumet who passed away earlier this year, it is a fine example of his work which includes such diverse work as The Pawnbroker, The Verdict and Dog Day Afternoon.

Flick of The Day: Touch of Evil

Orson Welles is one of the great figures of Hollywood cinema. A child prodigy, he created a masterpiece with his feature debut, Citizen Kane, aged just 26. There is a certain revisionist view in vogue at the moment, which attempts to lessen the importance of the film, but it is so wrong. Even the most myopic of modern viewers can see how far ahead of its time it was in style, narrative structure and technique. However, Kane was a commercial failure and a controversial one at that. Thereafter, Welles was never given the chance to make a film in Hollywood without interference, and never lived up to the early promise of his debut. However the closest he came was today's flick of the day, Touch of Evil.

Touch Of Evil (50th Anniversary Edition)

After a long period in the wilderness, Welles was hired to play the role of Captain Quinlan, a corrupt local police captain in a town on the American side of the Mexican border. As was often the case, he was soon directing and writing the feature, largely at the behest of star Charlton Heston. The film opens with a much imitated and lauded tracking shot in a rough and tumble Mexican border town, as a bomb is placed in the back of a car of a local businessman and his girlfriend. We follow the car as it moves to the border crossing, along the way we meet Mexican narcotics officer Ramon Vargas, played by Heston and his new bride Susan, played by Janet Leigh as they walk back to their Hotel on the American side. Just over the border, the bomb explodes in a fiery ball, killing the passengers. Of course, as the man on the spot, Vargas feels the need to get involved. Before long, Quinlan is on the scene and doesn't react well to Vargas' involvement. Together they investigate the crime, with Quinlan suspecting a local Mexican employee of the murdered man of planting the bomb. However he chooses to plant evidence on him rather then find proof, setting him on a collision course with Vargas. The film is classic noir, with an ending to match.

Welles is brilliant himself as the malevolent Quinlan, the big fish in the small pond used to getting his way all the time. As one of his former paramour's Tanya played Marlene Dietrich, puts it at the end of the film:

He was some kind of a man... What does it matter what you say about people?

While Heston is not believable as a Mexican, his straight laced approach to the role of the narcotics officer Vargas is well suited and he plays it well throughout. Janet Leigh isn't given a whole lot to do as his wife, apart from being set upon by a band of "marijuana fiends", in a scene that is funny in an unintended manner. 

The plot is no more then your average potboiler then, but it is made then the material by Welles direction. The opening tracking shot, which lasts nearly 3 and a half minutes is just one of a number of technically daring shots in the film and Welles assembled  a great supporting cast including cameo appearances from Zsa-Zsa Gabor and Joseph Cotten. Welles was always famous for his ability to work with actors, seeking their input which was something the likes of Janet Leigh has not experienced before:

"It started with rehearsals. We rehearsed two weeks prior to shooting, which was unusual. We rewrote most of the dialogue, all of us, which was also unusual, and Mr. Welles always wanted our input. It was a collective effort, and there was such a surge of participation, of creativity, of energy. You could feel the pulse growing as we rehearsed. You felt you were inventing something as you went along. Mr. Welles wanted to seize every moment. He didn't want one bland moment. He made you feel you were involved in a wonderful event that was happening before your eyes."

The film should have gone on to great critical acclaim, however when Welles presented his cut to Univeral Internation Pictures, they took the film away from and re-shot and edited it to the point where the plot was incomprehensible and robbed it of the style and wit he had wanted. It was released as a B movie and it largely disappeared from view thereafter until in 1998, the film was re-edited as per Welles wishes and released again on DVD where it found the audience it deserved.

Ultimately Welles never made another film for a major studio, and his relationship with Hollywood was frosty in general. Viewed today, it is a fine film, an entertaining story which is driven by strong performances from Welles and Heston. While not a masterpiece, it is a fine example of the talent of Orson Welles as a director, producing a silk purse of a film out of a sows ear of a b-movie story. Oh, what might have been...

Flick of The Day: Aliens

A few weeks back, we reviewed Ridley Scott's Alien, noting how it builds the tension through a creepy atmosphere to great effect. How then to follows this up? Once the cat is out of the bag so to speak, how do you create a follow up that is as tense, frightening and entertaining as the original? This was the task facing director James Cameron in 1986 with today's flick of the day Aliens. He delivered a modern classic by combining ground breaking special effects with pacy storytelling and another great performance from Sigourney Weaver that resulted in 7 Oscar nominations.

Aliens [Blu-ray]

The film opens as its predecessor ended, with Ripley, again played by Weaver, in hypersleep with her tabby cat having vanquished the alien from her life boat. Her boat is picked up by a passing space ship and she is rescued. After receiving medical care, she is awoken with the news delivered by her company's representative Carter Burke played by Paul Reiser, that she has been adrift in space for half a century and that the planet where they discovered the alien life as since been colonised. Her account of the destruction of the ship and the attack of the alien is met with ridicule and scepticism and she is removed from her position as a Warrant Officer. Initially depressed, she retreats from life, her family and relatives having long since passed away.  Soon, Reiser and a Colonial Marine return to her seeking help, contact has been lost with the colony and they are going to investigate.  Ripley initially refuses to help before relenting, haunted as she is by nightmares of her last encounter with the alien. Arriving to find the colony deserted, Ripley, Carter and the marines are soon in a fighter for survival as the planet is overwhelmed by the alien hoardes. 

While Alien was much more sombre in tone with a deliberately gradual escalation of tension, James Cameron's Aliens is much more action oriented but is no loss thrilling because of it. The special effects are used to great effect, in Cameron's own words, his plan from the beginning was to focus "more on terror, less on horror". The cast spend much of the movie confined to a small space fighting off the oncoming Aliens or moving through the darkened colony searching for human life. This creates an atmosphere of fear, of not knowing what is coming round the corner both literally and metaphorically. Again unlike the original, the character of Ripley is no longer a victim seeking to survive and escape the horror but a veteran out to kill the aliens off once and for all. This makes for an entertaining film.

If there is a criticism of this film to be made, it is that the film largely follows the same dynamic as the original but with a cast that is less developed, characters often seemingly there only to get squashed by the aliens and a script that is at times poor. The dialogue exists only to drive the plot forward.

Ripley: Lieutenant, what do those pulse rifles fire? 

Gorman: 10 millimeter explosive tip caseless. Standard light armor piercing round, why? 

Ripley: Well, look where your team is. They're right under the primary heat exchangers. 

Gorman: So? 

Ripley: So, if they fire their weapons in there, won't they rupture the cooling system?

That said, the film is always entertaining and action packed in a way few directors can deliver better then James Cameron. For all his many faults, the man can deliver an action sequence better then almost anyone else.

All in all, a fine sequel to a great film with enough cracks to see how things went so badly wrong with the next outing. Sigourney Weaver is excellent once again as Ripley, creating a heroine that shines through a clunky script. Cameron makes great use of the special effects available to him at the time and the film is an action packed adventure that doesn't slow down from the moment they arrive on the colony. A worthy addition to the genre and well worth a look.

Flick of The Day: The Maltese Falcon

When it comes to film noir and detective fiction in general, there are no more influential writers then Raymond Chandler with his creation of Philip Marlowe and Dashiell Hammett with his Sam Spade. Spade is the central focus of today's film, The Maltese Falcon. The novel was the source of two previous adaptations by Warner Bros before this, the definitive version with Humphrey Bogart as Sam Spade.

Legendary director, John Huston was 35 years old when he wrote and directed this classic tale of greed and its consequences for his debut outing as a director. The film opens with the following introducion:

"In 1539 the Knight Templars of Malta, paid tribute to Charles V of Spain, by sending him a Golden Falcon encrusted from beak to claw with rarest jewels——but pirates seized the galley carrying this priceless token and the fate of the Maltese Falcon remains a mystery to this day..."

The story is thus: Spade and his partner are hired by a mysterious woman to protect her from a man called Floyd Thursby. Before long, Spade's partner is dead and he is submerged into a web of deceit in the search for the titular falcon.

This was the role that made Humphrey Bogart a leading man, the next year he made Casablanca and was at the height of his profession and never looked back though he was not the first choice for the film. George Raft turned down the role because of an unwillingness to work with a first-time director. This proved a fatal mistake for Raft who's career went into terminal decline as the decade wore on, while Bogart became Hollywood royalty.

Bogart wasn't the only star though for this film had a truly stellar supporting cast with a fine performance from Sydney Greenstreet as the "Fat Man" and Peter Lorre playing his usual sinister foreigner. There is even a small appearance from the noted Western actor and John Ford alumnus, Ward Bond as a San Francisco detective.

One of the finest movies ever made and quite probably the best example of film noir at its best, The Maltese Falcon still weaves a tale today that is every bit as compelling as it was in 1941. One of the great achievements of this film is the superb cinematography from Arthur Edeson. The lighting is low key and the camera angles chosen are always strikingly unusual. The camera is often placed low to the ground, perhaps to reinforce the image of the characters being low down villains.

All in all, a film you just have to see.