Tag Archives: 1963 Films

The Three Lives of Thomasina-1963

The Three Lives of Thomasina-1963

Director Don Chaffey

Starring Patrick McGoohan, Susan Hampshire

Scott’s Review #1,367

Reviewed June 7, 2023

Grade: B

The Three Lives of Thomasina (1963) is a film in which the animal, in this case, a sleek orange tabby cat, steals the show from the humans. It’s not as if the acting by the actors is terrible but who doesn’t love a cute feline clad in a bonnet?

The film is a Disney production but not one of the top tier nor mainly well remembered and was unknown to me before I watched it. It’s sort of related to Mary Poppins (1963) in that the cheery tone is similar and the two child stars were signed to play the Banks children as a result of The Three Lives of Thomasina.

There are enough tender and sentimental moments to satisfy fans who may crave a deeper or darker veneer but there is some fluff and predictability to wrestle with.

With high hopes of entertaining our cats Zeus and Thora with this film the furry felines largely slept through the experience and rendered it uninteresting.

Schoolgirl Mary McDhui (Karen Dotrice) lives in a small village in Scotland with her stoic veterinarian father, Andrew (Patrick McGoohan), and her cherished cat, Thomasina.

When Thomasina is injured, Andrew has the animal euthanized, which infuriates Mary who vows never to forgive her father. Unbeknownst to everyone, Thomasina’s still-living body is rescued by Lori (Susan Hampshire), a kind animal healer who nurses the cat back to health.

The romantic intention of uniting Andrew and Lori is obvious from the start and the pair have decent chemistry. Lori is a Snow White type character, whistling and prancing through her garden befriending any animal who languishes near her.

Deemed a witch by neighborhood kids who are terrified by her healing powers she doesn’t look the part. With golden hair and attractive features, she is more Rapunzel than the wicked witch of the West.

Andrew is a masculine character we’ve seen time and time again in stories. Widowed, he has lost faith in humanity and god alike living a sad existence with his housekeeper and kids.

To nobody’s surprise, in the end, Andrew, Lori, the kids, Thomasina, and the housekeeper all ride off into the sunset as happy as clams.

Though the story is generic, other aspects of The Three Lives of Thomasina spruce things up brighter than the Scottish flowers. The landscape is magical with lush countryside sequences and cute side streets and cottages.

A fabulous sequence occurs at the midpoint when a ‘dead’ Thomasina soul goes to a feline afterlife and meets the Egyptian cat goddess Bastet. Since Thomasina still has eight lives left, Bastet returns her to her body.

The sparkling and twinkling lights and the myriad of other felines are beautiful and filled with emotion.

Hopefully, the real-life animals were treated kindly but in 1963 I’m not sure how much could be faked. Still, amazing work mimicking a wounded badger is impressive.

The thrilling finale involves a tribe of gypsies setting up camp in town and opening their traveling circus. Laden with obvious stereotypes which seem clear in 2023 but were unnoticed in 1963, the gypsies abuse their animals causing a stir among the townspeople.

A fight, fire, and justice prevails and all animals are spared.

A 1960s Disney film with family-friendly themes and compassion, The Three Lives of Thomasina (1963) will satisfy cat lovers or anyone fond of animals. The real-life Thomasina is worth the price of admission for her gorgeous good looks alone.

The V.I.P’s-1963

The V.I.P’s-1963

Director Anthony Asquith

Starring Elizabeth Taylor, Richard Burton, Louis Jourdan

Scott’s Review #1,263

Reviewed June 4, 2022

Grade: B+

The V.I.P.’s (1963) is a sweeping drama set against a foggy London airport. It’s a very good film but hardly a masterpiece as the trials and tribulations of the stranded passengers are explored and sometimes intersect in standard ways.

The film is formulaic and offers little surprise but I enjoyed it and was entertained by the parade of stars shuffling through the vast airport.

Some stories are more interesting than others and the film has a soap opera style fixating on the glamorous and rich characters.

One wonders if The V.I.P.’s influenced the creation of the film Airport (1970) seven years later, but the film itself is patterned after 1932’s Grand Hotel both distributed by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer.

Real-life couple, and Hollywood A-listers, Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton star and are the main draws of the film.

The all-star cast also features Louis Jourdan, Maggie Smith, Rod Taylor, Orson Welles, and the scene-stealing Margaret Rutherford.

Inclement weather has delayed a flight from London’s fabulous Heathrow Airport to New York City. A cross-section of elite passengers (V.I.P.s) impatiently wait to board the plane as they experience various life crises in the airport.

The main storyline surrounds Frances (Taylor), a gorgeous woman fleeing a loveless marriage to her millionaire husband, Paul (Richard Burton), and in love with the dashing Marc Champselle (Jourdan).

Supporting stories feature a dotty duchess (Rutherford) who has fallen on hard times, and a handsome businessman (Rod Taylor) trying to thwart a hostile takeover.

At the same time, his secretary (Smith) lusts after him, and Gloria (Elsa Martinelli), an aspiring actress accompanied by her money-grubbing producer, Max (Welles).

Despite the heavy-sounding plots the film is not overly severe and provides comical moments peppered in small doses. This secures the pacing and offsets too much doom and gloom.

The big soapy moments belong to Liz and Richard and rumor has it that the idea for the screenplay came to the writer Terence Rattigan by way of a real-life situation.

Actress Vivien Leigh was planning to leave her husband Laurence Olivier for another man but was delayed at Heathrow Airport.

How scandalous!

Nonetheless, Taylor stoically gives an acceptable performance as a conflicted actress in love with a man other than her husband. The setup plays out as tired as it sounds except for the juicy reality that Taylor and Burton were married and this provides the only interest.

Taylor and Burton have terrific chemistry though she also does with Jourdan. Still, there is something uncompelling and unsatisfying about the story.

Shockingly, they are all upstaged by Rutherford who steals the entire film which resulted in her surprising Best Supporting Actress victory. She may have won because of the Academy’s tendency to sometimes award an older actor with the prize for a lifetime body of work.

Her riveting story is my favorite as she desperately seeks a way to save her historic home.

The actress hits a homerun providing the much-needed comic relief and therefore the liveliest of the performances. Her peril is offset by her cleverness and her performance is filled with heart.

Many critics hastily insisted that Rutherford is the only reason to see The V.I.P.’s which I disagree with. Personally, the combination of an airport, peril, and big stars was more than enough to have me hooked.

The only addition that might have made the film better was an enormous fire or a hijacking crisis.

In the end, The V.I.P.’s (1963) will only appeal to fans of Taylor and Burton or those seeking something sudsy. Otherwise, the film is not too well remembered.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Supporting Actress-Margaret Rutherford (won)

The Great Escape-1963

The Great Escape-1963

Director John Sturges

Starring Steve McQueen, James Garner, Richard Attenborough

Scott’s Review #1,053

Reviewed August 17, 2020

Grade: B

Often heralded as one of the great World War II action films of all time, there is little great about the first half of the interminable two-hour and fifty-three-minute running time.

With enough military silliness to make television’s Hogan’s Heroes seem like high drama, the first half of The Great Escape (1963) would be graded a mediocre C or a C- and that’s being generous.

The final hour is an entirely different matter and when the actual “great escape” is launched the film kicks into high gear. Not only does the action kick off, but the characters become more layered, emotional, and compelling.

There are also killer location shots of Germany and Switzerland occurring at a zooming pace and the comedy soon turns to tragedy.

Why the decision to save all the goodies for the final act instead of dispersing them around is beyond me, but I am glad this film took off as it did.

Directed by John Sturges, known for creating a similarly masculine and muscular offering from 1960, The Magnificent Seven,  he once again is lucky to cast several of Hollywood’s then hot, young stars like Steve McQueen and James Garner, and more relatable character actors like Donald Pleasence and Richard Attenborough who provide the acting grit.

While not on my list of great World War II films (Schindler’s List (1993) gets top honors), the film is recommended for the gutsy and enthralling finale alone.

The film is based on Paul Brickhill’s 1950 nonfiction book of the same name, a firsthand account of the mass escape by British Commonwealth prisoners of war from German POW camp Stalag Luft III in Nazi Germany.

Unsurprisingly, and rather shockingly, the real events are significantly modified from the historical record, depicting a starkly fictionalized version of the escape, including Americans among the escapees.

Let’s discuss both portions, warts and all.

The changes are most irritating and done to make it more “Americanized” and therefore more appealing to mainstream audiences. This manipulation gnawed at me during most of the film since it’s factually incorrect.

To be fair, there is a brief disclaimer at the beginning of the film with a note saying the story is a work of fiction save for the escape portion, but this will inevitably be unnoticed or forgotten by the casual viewer.

Most of the first arc action is spent within the confinement of a massive, high-security, prisoner-of-war camp where the group of men is huddled, having escaped other camps or prisons. You would think the camp would be the equivalent of Alcatraz but besides some barbed wire and not-so-threatening German soldiers with guns they rarely use, it’s not so intimidating.

Nonetheless, shortly upon arrival, the group begins to plot their elaborate, mostly underground escape.

Whoever composed the musical score for the first section was going for a campy, situational comedy-style tone with brassy, patriotic tunes worthy of Gilligan’s Island.

This does nothing to create tension or danger nor do the Nazi soldiers.

The men would be terrifying and rely on torture, but there is none of that to be found. Safe, but trying to be stern, this does not work as the German soldiers are played more like foils than those to be feared.

When the “great escape” is upon us, The Great Escape gets an A-plus for its thrills, action, and emotion.

A harrowing plane ride taken by Robert Hendley (Garner) and Colin Blythe (Pleasence) is juicy with tension and atmosphere. As the duo flies low across the German terrain heading over the Swiss Alps for safety the plane exhibits trouble.

Meanwhile, Hilts (McQueen) steals a motorcycle and traverses the Germany/Switzerland border in a frantic chase scene while the Germans are in hot pursuit.

In a third sequence, other men flee via train in a cat-and-mouse pursuit.

Seventy-six POWs flee the camp and a startling fifty are killed. Twenty-three are returned to the camp and only three successfully escape.

If Sturges had built around the final hour and reduced the silly comedy style, probably attempting a contrasting theme to make the drama more imbalanced, he might have had a masterpiece on hand.

Instead, The Great Escape (1963) is a twofold experience.

A comedy that develops into a nail-biting, edge-of-your-seat thriller, but suffers from too much historical inaccuracy to reach the depths of cinematic greatness.

Oscar Nominations: Best Film Editing

The Leopard-1963

The Leopard-1963

Director Luchino Visconti

Starring Burt Lancaster, Claudia Cardinale

Scott’s Review #991

Reviewed February 18, 2020

Grade: A

One of the great works in cinematic history, I preface this review by stating that I viewed the English dubbed version of the brilliant The Leopard (1963) starring Burt Lancaster and Claudia Cardinale.

This version is considerably shorter, at two hours and forty-one minutes than the Italian version, which is three hours and five minutes.

As grand as the former is, my hunch is that something is lost in translation put side by side with the latter. The English version has no subtitles and is available only on DVD, so the film is difficult to follow but is still rich in texture.

An interesting tidbit is that the film surgery was performed without director Luchino Visconti’s input – the director was unhappy with the editing and the dubbing. This point is valid since some of the voices are Italian and French, sounding too American and unauthentic.

Admittedly inferior, the English version is nonetheless extravagant and lovely by its own merits, though I am dying to see the original version, if available.

The time is during the 1860s as the tumultuous era affected the country of Italy and more specifically, Sicily. Prince Don Fabrizio Salina (Lancaster) is at a crossroads, torn between holding onto the glory he once knew and accepting the changing times, welcoming a more modern unity within the country.

He is surrounded by a new mayor, Don Calogero Sedara (Paolo Stoppa) who has a gorgeous daughter, Angelica (Cardinale), who intends to marry Fabrizio’s French nephew, Tancredi Falconeri (Alain Delon).

The film dissects the changing times in Italy.

The visual treats that await the viewer are astounding and by far the best part of the film. The lovely and palatial estates are gorgeous with decorative sets, bright and zesty colors, and ravishing meals displayed during parties to make any audience member salivate with joy.

The costumes are state of the art, as each frame can easily be a painting on a canvas. A tip is to periodically pause the film and study and immerse oneself in its style.

Many film comparisons, both past and yet to come, can easily be made when thought about. An Italian Gone with the Wind (1939), if you will, with Angelica as Scarlett and Tancredi as Rhett (okay, the chemistry is not quite the same, but similarities do exist), and Concetta as the long-suffering Melanie, the characters can be compared.

The great ball, the costumes, and the ravaged country are more prominent comparisons.

Nine years after The Leopard, a little film entitled The Godfather (1972) would change the cinematic landscape forever.

Director, Frances Ford Coppola must have studied this film, as the plentiful scenes of the Italian landscape and the Italian culture are immersed in both films. Even snippets of the musical score mirror each other.

What a grand film to borrow and cultivate from!

Despite all the beautiful trimmings that make The Leopard a masterpiece, the film belongs to Lancaster, in the best role of his career. The hunk in 1953’s From Here to Eternity, as the Prince, he is aged to perfection, distinguished-looking with graying sideburns.

The film is an epic extravaganza and the actor leads the charge, carrying the film. He is a stoic man, but not without fault and emotion, wearing his heart on his sleeve, realizing that he must adapt to the changing times. We feel his quandary and embrace the character as a human being.

Attention-paying fans must be forewarned that the plot is basic and while difficult to follow because of the absence of sub-titles, at the same time there is not a highly complex story to follow.

The story is about how the Prince maneuvers his family through troubled (and changing) times to a more secure position. This is the overlying theme of the film.

Suffering from dubbing and quality control issues can do nothing to ruin a spectacular offering that is a cinematic gem and testament to the power of The Leopard’s (1963) staying power.

I eagerly await the day when the traditional Italian version can be located, and discovered, as this will assuredly be a treat to sink my teeth into.

Until then, the film is a historical epic that can be appreciated for the dynamics and importance it so richly deserves.

Oscar Nominations: Best Costume Design, Color

8 1/2-1963

8 1/2-1963

Director Federico Fellini

Starring Marcelo Mastroianni, Claudia Cardinale

Scott’s Review #973

Reviewed December 27, 2019

Grade: A-

For fans of acclaimed and experimental Italian film director, Federico Fellini, a straightforward plot is rarely the recipe of the day with his projects.

With 8 1/2 (1963) he creates a personal and autobiographical story of a movie director pressured into another project but lacking creative ideas and inspiration to fulfill the task.

We can all relate to this in one way or another.

The film is confusing, beautiful, elegant, and dreamlike, precisely what one would expect of a Fellini production. His film also hints at a more profound message and complexities.

The recommendation is to experience the film rather than analyze or worse yet, over-analyze it, simply letting it marinate over time and relish in the offerings.

Guido Anselmi (Marcello Mastroianni) is a famous Italian film director suffering from director’s block after he is tasked with, and attempts to direct, an epic science fiction film.

Experiencing marital difficulties, he decides to spend time at a luxurious spa where he has strange reoccurring visions of a beautiful woman (Claudia Cardinale), is visited by his mistress Carla (Sandra Milo), and is berated by a temperamental film critic.

When Guido’s film crew arrives at his hotel in the hopes of starting production, he becomes overwhelmed by the mounting pressures and escapes into a world of memories. He visits his grandmother, dances with a prostitute, and relives his time at a strict Catholic school.

Attempts to add these memories to his new film are dismissed by the film critic. The rest of the film is a mish-mash of odd occurrences as Guido attempts to make his film.

Fans of Fellini’s other works will undoubtedly fall in love with 8 1/2, and since the film is about film this scores points in my book.

His other famous works like Roma (1972) and Amarcord (1973) are similarly semi-autobiographical but differ in that they are more straightforward stories- as much as can be said about a Fellini film.

Usually lacking much plot 8 1/2 resembles Juliet and the Spirits (1965) more than the others for comparison’s sake. Fantasy and reality are interspersed, making the film tough to follow.

It appears to be about a man on the brink of a nervous breakdown and is a complex and personal study. As Guido spirals out of control and teetering towards insanity, he also muses about his situation. These highs and lows told comically make 8 1/2 even more difficult to figure out and react to.

My previous suggestion to simply experience 8 1/2 achieves credibility as the film rolls along. Viewers may be unsure of what is happening, if not downright perplexed by the whole thing, but there is an energy that pulls one into its clutches with masterful sequences and potent embraces of life, love, and culture.

This must be attributed to the look and style of the film.

8 1/2 won the Academy Awards for Best Foreign Language Film and Best Costume Design (black-and-white) and is considered a highly respected and influential work of art by most film critics.

Appreciated mostly for its beautiful cinematography, it also delves into the meaning of life with a live-and-let-live approach.

Lovers of avant-garde works of interpretation and expressionism will be giddy with delight while experiencing ruminating thoughts following 8 1/2 (1963).

Having only seen the film once and embraced it wholly as a work of art, but frustrated by the lack of tangible meaning, my advice is to see the film a second, a third, or even a fourth time for a deeper appreciation and understanding.

I plan to heed my suggestion.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Director-Federico Fellini, Best Story, and Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen, Best Foreign Language Film (won), Best Art Direction, Black-and-White, Best Costume Design, Black-and-White (won)

The Sword in the Stone-1963

The Sword in the Stone-1963

Director Wolfgang Reitherman

Voices Sebastian Cabot, Karl Swenson

Scott’s Review #896

Reviewed May 10, 2019

Grade: B

The 1960s, while not known as the very best of decades for Walt Disney productions, offers a small gem of a film in The Sword in the Stone (1963).

The film, flying marginally under the radar, is not typically well-remembered but is a solid offering, mixing elements of magic and royalty within a cute story.

The production holds the dubious honor of being the final Disney animated film to be released before Walt Disney’s death.

While the film is not great, neither is it bad.

Engaging and innocent it does not offer the ravaging tragedy of Bambi (1942), the emotion of Dumbo (1941) nor the beauty of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937).

What the Sword in the Stone does offer is an adventure with an appealing lead character, mildly entertaining supporting characters, and a whole host of fun antics enshrouded around education.

Set during ancient times, the King of England has died, leaving no heir to the throne. This elicits peril and worries since with no successor in place, the country is doomed for war. One day a miracle occurs and an odd “Sword in the Stone” appears inside a sturdy anvil in London, with an inscription proclaiming that whoever removes it will be the new king.

Despite a myriad of attempts none of the strong townsmen succeed and England is reduced to the Dark Ages, leaving the sword and the stone forgotten.

When one day a twelve-year-old lad named Arthur appears, he teams up with his tutor, Merlin the wizard, and the adventures commence.

Inevitably Arthur can remove the sword from the stone and will go on to lead the Knights of the Round Table, accomplishing many amazing feats and becoming one of the most famous figures in history- King Arthur.

The Sword in the Stone entertains and pleases the eyes in many regards with vibrant colors and an array of bells and whistles creatively interspersed throughout a myriad of scenes.

The main villain of the story, Madam Mim, is Merlin’s main nemesis. Haggard and dripping with black magic powers, she can turn from a pink elephant into a queen with the flick of her wrist as she giggles and prances about.

Despite being dastardly she is also fun and zany and delights in her brief screen time.

The whimsical antics of Merlin are the best aspects of The Sword in the Stone as the senior gentleman bursts and bumbles from one oddity to another in earnest attempts to aid Arthur.

Thanks to clever writing an educational angle is robustly incorporated into the story. Merlin can see into the future, at least in glimpses, such as knowing that the world is round, not flat.

What a great learning tool the film provides for young kids to discover.

The story risks playing too amateurish in some parts where I can see children under the age of twelve enthralled but adults finding the film too childish to take seriously.

Despite my best efforts to stay tuned, I noticed tidbits of the film that seem too cute for me.

When Merlin and Arthur are turned into squirrels and strike the fancy of adorable but clueless female squirrels, the scene seems best catered to very young audiences.

What would give the film some bombast would be a good solid theme song or a powerful love story. Both aspects, able to solidify a hit for Disney, are glaringly missing.

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs contain the lovely “Someday My Prince Will Come” while Snow White and the Prince offer a rich love story.

While good, The Sword in the Stone can reach only the second tier of Disney classics, missing the upper echelon with only so-so musical offerings.

A slight miss is a way Arthur’s voice changes back and forth from a child to a teenager going through puberty and this is drastically noticeable.

The reason, rather perplexing when analyzed, is that three different actors were used to play Arthur resulting in some consistency issues.

Why not just use one actor or age the character slowly and gradually deepen his voice? The back and forth feels sloppy.

At the end of the day, the criticisms targeted at The Sword in the Stone (1963) are minor and forgivable as the film plays above average graded on its terms.

The film has a nice message for children about the importance of education and is a wonderful delight best served to the whole family.

Oscar Nominations: Best Scoring of Music-Adaptation or Treatment

From Russia with Love-1963

From Russia with Love-1963

Director Terence Young

Starring Sean Connery, Daniela Bianchi

Scott’s Review #615

Reviewed February 5, 2017

Grade: A

From Russia with Love (1963), only the second in the storied James Bond film franchise is a sequel to the debut installment, Dr. No, and received twice the budget that its predecessor did.

This is evident as the cinematography and the look of the film are exquisite with chase and battle scenes galore.

The film is lavish and grand and what a Bond film ought to be consisting of adventures through countries, gorgeous location sequences, and a nice romance between Bond (Sean Connery) and Bond girl, Tatiana (Daniela Bianchi), though she is not in my top Bond girls of all time.

Terence Young returned to direct the film with successful results.

Vowing revenge on James Bond for killing villainous Dr. No, SPECTRE’s Number 1 (seen only speaking and holding a cat) recruits evil Number 3, Rosa Klebb, a Russian director and defector, and Kronsteen, SPECTRE’s expert planner, to devise a plot to steal a Lektor cryptographic device from the Soviets and kill Bond in the process.

Klebb recruits expert killer Donald “Red” Grant and manipulates Tatiana into assisting. The story takes Bond mostly through Istanbul, Turkey, into a gypsy camp, and via the Orient Express through Yugoslavia to the ultimate climax.

The villains in From Russia with Love are outstanding and a major draw to the film.

Both Klebb (Lotte Lenya) and Grant (Robert Shaw) are perfectly cast. Klebb, militant and severe with her short-cropped red hair, has a penchant for deadly footwear (she has a spike that shoots out from her boot containing venom that kills in seconds) and casually flaunts her lesbianism in front of Tatiana.

I admire this level of diversity in early Bond films from a sexual perspective- it was 1963 and this was extremely rare to see in the film.

Grant, on the other hand, is handsome and charismatic and has a chest of steel. With his good looks and bleached blonde hair, he is a perfect opponent for Bond as the final battle between him and Bond aboard the Orient Express is a spectacular fight scene and a satisfactory conclusion to the film.

The action sequences are aplenty and compelling especially the aforementioned, and lengthy Orient Express train sequence finale, which is grand. As Bond and Tatiana, along with their ally Ali Kerim Bey, a British Intelligence chief from Istanbul, embark on a journey, they are stalked by Grant, who waits for an opportunity to pounce on his foes.

This sequence is the best part of the film for me- Grant, posing as a sophisticated British agent, has a cat-and-mouse style conversation with Bond and Tatiana over a delicious dinner of Sole.

Grant drugs Tatiana by placing capsules in her white wine- the fact that he orders Chianti with Sole- a culinary faux pas- gives him away.

Other notable aspects of From Russia with Love are the soon-to-be familiar cohorts of Bond who will be featured in Bond films for years to come: M, Q, and Miss Moneypenny become treasured supporting characters that audiences know and love.

Mere novices in this film, it is fun to see their scenes- especially lovelorn Moneypenny.

An odd scene of sparring female gypsies is both erotic and comical as the two women wrestle and fight over a gypsy chief, only to soon forget their rivalry and both bed Bond- falling madly in love with him as the two women suddenly become the best of friends.

The chemistry between Connery and Bianchi is good, but nothing spectacular and not the real highlight of this Bond entry. Don’t get me wrong- they make a gorgeous couple- his dark, suave looks and her statuesque blonde figure look great, but I found the pairing just decent rather than spectacular.

The action sequences, especially the Orient Express scenes are a spectacle and the many location shots in and around Istanbul are ravishing.

From Russia with Love (1963) is a top entry in the Bond series and a film that got the ball rolling with fantastic Bond features- it is an expensively produced film and this shows.

The Birds-1963

The Birds-1963

Director Alfred Hitchcock

Starring Tippi Hedren, Rod Taylor

Top 100 Films #2     Top 20 Horror Films #2     

Scott’s Review #173

308926

Reviewed September 22, 2014

Grade: A

The Birds is one of director Alfred Hitchcock’s finest works.

Made in 1963, following Psycho, it continues Hitchcock’s run of successes, both commercially and critically.

Set in northern California (in both San Francisco and Bodega Bay) it tells the story of unexplained bird attacks in a peaceful small bay town.

Tippi Hedren plays Melanie Daniels, a wealthy socialite from San Francisco, who drives to Bodega Bay to romantically pursue a love interest, Mitch Brenner.

Mitch, played by Rod Taylor, is a successful attorney who meets and shares a flirtation with Melanie the day before at a San Francisco pet store. He regularly visits his mother (Jessica Tandy) and sister (Veronica Cartwright) in Bodega Bay.

Once Melanie arrives in town birds begin periodically attacking the locals living in the sleepy community.

The Birds is a film that holds up incredibly well and is as exciting and horrifying today as it has ever been in the past.

One intriguing aspect of the film is that it offers no rhyme or reason for the bird attacks, which keeps the viewer guessing from the moment a gull swoops down and attacks innocent Melanie.

It is completely mysterious and open to interpretation- are birds fed up with being caged?

Are the love birds that Melanie purchased the cause of the attacks? Do the birds hate humans? Why do they attack the children? Why do they peck the eyes of their victims out?

One could spend hours debating these questions.

A major creative success of the film is its elimination of a musical score. The eerie silence mixed in with the loud sounds of the birds attacking is a haunting dynamic.

My favorite scene of The Birds features Melanie sitting on a wooden bench in the schoolyard enjoying a cigarette. Behind her is a deserted jungle gym. She barely notices a tiny bird innocently fly past her and land on the jungle gym.

She continues smoking her cigarette. The viewer sees what Melanie cannot- as slowly hundreds of birds land on the jungle gym behind her.

Without music, this scene is deadly silent and very dramatic as it switches from close-ups of Melanie to long shots of the birds gravitating behind her.

Another interesting aspect of The Birds is the character relationships- Mitch’s mother Lydia is afraid of losing her son so she initially despises Melanie; Mitch’s ex-girlfriend, schoolteacher Annie Hayworth strikes up a close friendship with Melanie- one might expect them to be rivals.

A hysterical mother lashes out at Melanie, calling her evil, and blaming her for the attacks.

One wonders, amid the long periods of calm, when the next attack will occur- and we know it will. We look for clues as to what triggers the attacks and we find none.

This makes for brilliant and suspenseful filmmaking. They hardly come better than the masterpiece that is The Birds (1963).

Oscar Nominations: Best Special Effects

Blood Feast-1963

Blood Feast-1963

Director H.G.Lewis

Starring Thomas Wood, Connie Mason

Scott’s Review #100

26602278

Reviewed July 10, 2014

Grade: B-

Blood Feast (1963) is the debut film by horror master H.G. Lewis, who invented the gore genre.

The film is simplistic and makes his later films almost seem a big budget.

This film is not meant to be taken seriously and anyone who does is completely missing the point. It is exploitation, but completely over-the-top, with wooden performances for laughs, specifically by Connie Mason, who stinks.

The story involves a demented caterer who is hired by a mother to cater an Egyptian-themed dinner party. He, of course, uses real body parts to complete the meal is obsessed with some silly curse, and owns a female Egyptian statue that talks to him.

The kills are laughing out loud in their basic shock value and all the victims are women.

One victim’s tongue is torn out, as another is whipped to death, which, in a more modern film like Saw would be horrific. But the kills are so comedic, and the gore blood so amateurish, that the audience cannot help but chuckle.

The highlight for me was the intentionally (let’s hope) horrendous acting by all involved.

I much prefer H.G. Lewis’s later films, but this blueprint is a nice introduction.