Category Archives: 1971 Films

The House That Dripped Blood-1971

The House That Dripped Blood-1971

Director Peter Duffell

Starring Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing

Scott’s Review #1,408

Reviewed October 31, 2023

Grade: B+

Any horror project including Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing is worth a watch and The House That Dripped Blood (1971) features both actors though sadly not in any scenes together.

The British horror anthology is spooky and perfect for the Halloween season. The action surrounds a hulking house where bad events occur regardless of who inhabits it.

The film is divided into four short stories explaining the circumstances surrounding the individual inhabitants.

The production is low budget which is perfect for a film like this but the title makes it seem bloodier and gorier than it is.

All of the stories were originally written, and subsequently scripted, by Robert Bloch.

Below is a summary, review, and rating of each vignette.

Framework: B+

Shortly after renting an old country house, a well-known film star Paul Henderson mysteriously disappears and Inspector Holloway (John Bennett) from Scotland Yard is called by a local Sergeant to investigate.

Inquiring at the local police station, he is told some of the house’s history.

He soon learns how four tenants met macabre fates.

The ‘Framework’ sequence goes between the vignettes and provides good context but is more or less just the interplay between Inspector and Sergeant.

This serves as an introduction to each chapter and ties the events together.

Method for Murder: A-

Charles Hillyer (Denholm Elliott) is a struggling writer who specializes in horror stories. He and his wife Alice (Joanna Dunham), move into the house thinking it will serve as inspiration. Charles creates a devious character named ‘Dominic’ after he ‘imagines’ seeing him outside a window.

Charles soon starts to see Dominic, who begins stalking and tormenting him.

My second favorite of the four chapters, I all but guessed the ‘twist’ from the get-go but was surprised at the ‘twist on top of a twist’ which pleased me.

It’s great when a villain thinks they’ve gotten away with murder only to be murdered themselves.

Waxworks: B+

Retired stockbroker Philip Grayson (Cushing) moves into the house with plans to read, garden, and relax. Though initially he occupies himself with his hobbies, he quickly becomes lonely. One day, while wandering around town, he happens upon a wax museum.

Grayson explores the museum and finds a sculpture of a dead woman he had been in love with. The museum’s proprietor explains that he based the likeness of the sculpture on his late wife, who had been executed after murdering his best friend.

Despite featuring Cushing, it’s a moderately good story but lacks the compelling nature of a couple of the other vignettes.

It’s less about the house itself and more about the wax museum and obsession is the subject matter.

While decent, Waxworks didn’t blow me away either.

Sweets to the Sweet: A

Widower John Reid (Lee) moves into the house next along with his odd young daughter Jane (Chloe Franks). John hires former teacher Ann Norton (Nyree Dawn Porter) to tutor Jane. Ann bonds with Jane, she helps Jane get over a fear of fire.

Ann suspects John of abusing Jane but is there more to the story? Why doesn’t he let Jane play with other children or toys and do his best to keep her isolated?

Is there something wrong with Jane?

This is the best installment and has a resemblance to The Innocents (1961) featuring a governess and a spooky child. Viewers will find themselves switching alliances with the characters as the story rapidly moves along.

The Cloak: B+

Finally, horror film actor Paul Henderson (Jon Pertwee) moves into the house while starring in a vampire film being shot nearby.

Irritated by the lack of maturity or talent from the cast and crew he decides to purchase a realistic cloak worn by his character (who happens to be a vampire). The shop he makes his purchase from is run by the enigmatic Theo von Hartmann (Geoffrey Bayldon) who eerily offers him a black cloak.

This one plays like a Hammer Horror Dracula installment and is good but not great. Less happens within the confines of the house than I’d like and Paul is an unlikable character.

The action on the movie set and in the shop are the best parts.

The Boy Friend-1971

The Boy Friend-1971

Director Ken Russell

Starring Twiggy, Christopher Gable

Scott’s Review #1,407

Reviewed October 27, 2023

Grade: B+

With each Ken Russell film, I see the expectation is for something wacky and I sit back for a schizophrenic roller coaster ride.

His finest efforts like Women in Love (1970), The Devils (1971), and Tommy (1975) offer bombast and weirdness in their way.

The British director decided to take on The Boy Friend (1971), a reworking of a 1953 traditional musical of the same name by Sandy Wilson, and turn it upside down on its ass. Those expecting a conventional affair with cheery sing-along numbers in perfect symmetry will be disappointed.

The messy project has its ups and downs and meanders off course on more than one occasion. With jagged storytelling and dragging sequences, it makes up ground with the sizzling visuals and costumes and offers the audience a glimpse of theatre drama and shenanigans both onstage and offstage.

On its own merits and considering the director is Russell it gets a marginal thumbs up but is nowhere near as fantastic as his other works.

Causing a bit of confusion, the plot is divided into three levels. Level one tells the main story, where, in the south of England in the 1920s, a struggling theatrical troupe is performing a musical about romantic intrigues at a finishing school for young women in the south of France.

The cast awkwardly strives to impress a visiting famous movie director with hopes of fame and fortune. They giggle, improvise, and scheme to get noticed at the risk of upstaging the other cast members.

Next, there is the musical itself. Four of the girls at the school are very forward and acquire boyfriends, but Polly, played by 1960s supermodel Twiggy, is shy and has nobody to take her to the carnival masked ball that night. Tony (Christopher Gable), a messenger boy from a dress shop, brings her a costume, and they fall in love.

Finally, there are extensive fantasy sequences in the film, during which the characters’ dreams and hopes are enacted in music and dance sans dialogue.

Glenda Jackson, who won an Oscar for Russell’s Women in Love returns in an uncredited appearance as the theatre star who Polly must fill in for when she breaks her leg.

The crux of the film is the romance between Polly and Tony. While there is some chemistry between the duo they never completely take off as the centerpiece either.

The cleverness is in the reveal of the twist within the stage production cementing the pair’s connection, as characters in the play.

Nonetheless, there are too many other things going on to care about the lovebirds for very long.

The musical numbers got my attention, especially towards the end of the film. My personal favorite ‘It’s Nicer in Nice’ kickstarts the action with high-caliber energy and shout-outs to other geographical cities in comparison to Nice, France. It’s a fun regional experience with great culture and an upbeat rhythm.

The chirpy ‘It’s Never Too Late to Fall in Love’ follows soon after offering a gleeful ending.

The fantasy sequences waste story potential and offer no plot direction but are fun to watch anyway. Dripping with colors and razzle-dazzle the chaotic events are dreamlike and foot-stomping.

Twiggy, with little to no prior film experience, is quite impressive in the lead role. Her voice is strong and her acting skills are more than adequate. What might have been a disaster is not thanks to her talents.

Even though other Ken Russell films are tighter and linear The Boy Friend (1971) is worth the watch, especially for his diehard fans.

Oscar Nominations: Best Music, Adaptation, and Original Song Score

The Devils-1971

The Devils-1971

Director Ken Russell

Starring Oliver Reed, Vanessa Redgrave

Scott’s Review #1,403

Reviewed October 4, 2023

Grade: A

Ken Russell, most famous for directing the outstanding Women in Love (1970) and The Who’s Tommy (1975) creates a disturbing opus about perversion and scandal amid the Roman Catholic church during medieval times.

The film’s graphic portrayal of violence, sexuality, and religious blasphemy ignited shocked reactions from censors, and it originally received an X rating in both the United Kingdom and the United States. It was banned in several countries, and heavily edited for exhibition in others.

This alone will pique open-minded and curious viewer’s interests. It sure did mine.

The film is ironically entitled The Devils (1971) and stars Russell stalwart Oliver Reed who also appeared in the aforementioned films.  Reed leads the charge as a sexy, rugged man who beds many women and is the center of a convent full of nuns’ nasty and naughty thoughts.

Vanessa Redgrave also appears as a lustful and evil nun with a hunchback.

During the period of seventeenth-century France, Father Grandier (Reed) was a priest whose unorthodox views on sex and religion influenced a passionate following of nuns, including the sexually obsessed Sister Jeanne (Redgrave).

When the power-hungry Cardinal Richelieu (Christopher Logue) realizes he must eliminate Grandier to gain control of France, Richelieu vows to destroy the man. He portrays Grandier as a Satanist and spearheads a public outcry to destroy the once-loved priest’s reputation.

The Devils is outrageous and bizarre in only the best of possible ways. Who doesn’t love a healthy dose of nun orgies and simulating fellatio on a large candlestick? One nun violently masturbates as another looks on giggling sadistically.

The camera simply loves Reed and Redgrave who it’s interesting to note are not a couple in the film. These British actors were in their heyday in 1971 and both portray roles that must have challenged them tremendously.

Despite being British the film takes place in France getting off to a naughty start with a nearly nude dance performed by skinny Louis XIII (played with wacky delight by Graham Armitage). Rumored to be gay the king traipses around in colorful costumes and later shoots protestants dressed as gorillas for sport.

There are themes of exorcising and burning at the stake and mentions of the warring Catholics and Protestants so there is a seriousness amid the antics and shenanigans.

It took me a little while to become fully immersed in the chaotic land of Loudon, a town in western France where the film is set. In truth, a second viewing really helped me settle in and have a sense of what was going on.

The best films really are like fine wines.

Attempts by Russell to irritate and incite the overly religious are quite satisfying in a wicked way. As much as he mocks religion by making the traditionally sexually conservative filled with lust and animalistic sexual prowess there is much more going on.

Beneath the surface, he challenges the ridiculousness of religion which cinema lovers will embrace and delight in. There are history lessons to be had though and the film provides exceptional details of the political upheavals and tyranny that occurred.

The thunderous musical score by Peter Maxwell Davies is fabulous especially during The Devils final act when a major character endures a broiling on a wooden stake.

Those possessing the wonderful Blu-Ray version of the film can be treated to various outtakes, cast interviews, and behind-the-scenes information.

An added delight for knowledgeable film fans is the inclusion of character actor Murray Melvin, famous for playing Reverand Runt in the classic Barry Lyndon (1975). He plays Father Pierre Barre.

The Devils (1971) is a perverse and operatic extravaganza of lunacy. It’s caked with sex and nudity and blasphemy that I loved every bit of. The dangerous tone can be studied and thought about long after the film ends.

The Hospital-1971

The Hospital-1971

Director Arthur Hiller

Starring George C. Scott, Diana Rigg

Scott’s Review #1,369

Reviewed June 11, 2023

Grade: A

An example of the freedom to craft one’s vision allowed in cinematic works during the first half of the1970s, The Hospital (1971) is a testament to the creativity and exceptional writing and what can happen when studios and producers leave the creatives alone to make the film they want to make.

One can dismiss any preconceived notions of the classic medical dramas that flooded television networks during the 1970s and 1980s. The Hospital is not formulaic or contrived.

No, The Hospital is a dark work drooling with satirical examples of the politics and shenanigans within the medical community. Oftentimes, secondary activities come at the cost of good care and quality medicines.

Before you imagine a doctor and nurse cavorting in a janitor’s closet, it’s a deeper film than it appears on the surface despite the inclusion of witty comedy. A lax patient care, staff deaths, and the dismissal of nearby residents because of a new drug rehabilitation project are explored in this fascinating film.

At a rundown Manhattan teaching hospital, chief of staff Herb Bock (George C. Scott) is riddled with multiple personal and professional problems after two doctors and one nurse are found dead almost simultaneously.

He assumes the rash of deaths is due to dimwitted staff who are overworked amid the chaos.

Suicidal, he meets the intelligent daughter of a patient who knocks him off his feet with her studious personality and reflections of the world. Barbara Drummond is played by Diana Rigg.

Immediately noticeable is the clever and well-paced screenplay while I was unknowledgeable of the fact that Paddy Chayefsky had won the Oscar for writing the film. Immediately, the chaos of a city hospital is exposed but not in a cliched way like a series like ER or Grey’s Anatomy might show.

Nobody is going into cardiac arrest on the operating table or having convulsions in the waiting room amid lame dramatic music.

The Hospital is more cerebral than that.

Unknown patients and little-known hospital staff go about their everyday business like clockwork until confusion with daily tasks causes events to go awry.

Like real-life.

The brilliance is how director Arthur Hiller casts regular-looking actors in almost all the roles. They look and act like everyday hospital staff so that the proper tone is set. This is even before we meet and get to know Herb and Barbara. They answer phones, walk around with charts, and hustle after emergencies.

Chayefsky and Hiller mirror director Robert Altman in many ways mostly in the dialogue and how seemingly unimportant scenes mean a whole lot.

In robust soliloquy-style scenes between Herb and Barbara the audience ‘gets them’. They are both desperate, wounded, and unhappy yet possess the sophistication and awareness to realize how similar they are.

They immediately connect, fall in love, and nearly run off together. It’s that simple. They are willing to flee their lives after meeting for five minutes. But will they ultimately take that plunge?

A key character is revealed to be Barbara’s father and a whodunit begins after it comes to light that the deaths are not accidents. Who is responsible and what their motivation is is the key to the story.

Scott does wonderful work with his character and rivals his excellent performance a year earlier in Patton (1970). Herb is more introspective with the world on his shoulders.

The Hospital has more than one daring scene. Herb, though impotent, basically throws Barbara down on the table and rapes her. The shocker is she makes light of it the next day and almost seems to have enjoyed it.

Barbara and Herb are both complex characters that the audience needs to ruminate over.

My favorite part of The Hospital (1971) is the setting. That Hiller puts you inside what a real urban hospital was like in 1971 is brilliance. The satire comes into play with the writing which questions decision-making and incompetence within the hospital walls.

Only, the result is a scathing look at hospital practices and will hit home to anyone terrified of entering a hospital only to never come out again.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Actor-George C. Scott, Best Original Screenplay (won)

Klute-1971

Klute-1971

Director Alan J. Pakula

Starring Jane Fonda, Donald Sutherland

Scott’s Review #1,351

Reviewed March 12, 2023

Grade: A-

I’ll gladly watch any film Jane Fonda appears in especially early treats like They Shoot Horses, Don’t They (1969), Coming Home (1978), and On Golden Pond (1981), but Klute (1971) trumps them all.

Fonda plays a prostitute, one with intelligence, manipulation skills, and deep introspective thought. Teamed with Donald Sutherland who has quiet cool, the duo sink their teeth into a taut psychological thriller chasing a serial killer.

The inventive part is that the film is hardly a whodunit but uses long sequences of calm dialogue and little editing breaks making it stand out with great style and substance.

Bree Daniel (Fonda), is a New York City call girl who becomes absorbed in an investigation into the disappearance of a business executive. Detective John Klute (Sutherland) is hired to follow Bree and eventually begins a romance with her.

Klute is not the only one on Bree’s trail. A killer is on the loose having killed two prostitutes that Bree is friendly with. They must figure out the deadly puzzle before it’s too late.

Fonda plays Bree wonderfully. Gorgeous and well-dressed, Bree is aching to leave the business and launch an acting or modeling career but she continues to strike out on both fronts. Fonda assures the audience that Bree is smart and uses her smarts to get the best of the men she beds.

During several scenes where she chats with her shrink, we learn a great deal about Bree and the workings of her mind. While she cringes at a dull life of being married and darning socks, she also craves stability and self-worth.

She aptly embraces her lifestyle but on her terms. When briefly jaded by a pimp played by Roy Scheider, I cringed because Bree is better than that.

I only wanted to learn a bit more about Bree’s childhood and how she wound up as a call girl but at the same time, the mystique works well. The ambiguity only makes Bree more complex.

Pre-conceived notions or sub-par writing might have had the character dubbed the overdone ‘hooker with the heart of gold’ title but there are no cliches to be found.

Written by the team of Andy and Dave Lewis, and directed by Alan J. Pakula, they construct a complex film with equal focus on the intriguing serial killer pursuit and the workings of its lead female character.

Surprisingly, the men achieve both goals. In later years the screenplay might have been written by a female but it’s impressive how boldly they write Bree.

The character of Klute is also well-written. Similarly shrouded in mystery, we know that the investigator is the strong silent type and falls for Bree hook, line, and sinker. Has he been married? Does he have kids? Why the fascination with Bree?

He only mirrors the audience as we become equally smitten with her. The fact that he knows the killer is icing on the cake and adds rich texture to the storytelling.

The other facets of Klute are strong from a technical and location perspective.

The interior sequences, mostly of Bree’s apartment building, are superior, with dull lighting and an eerie musical score to set the proper mood. Downsizing from Park Avenue, Bree has a decent Manhattan apartment but with dated appliances and unflattering lighting.

The exterior New York City location shots are fun to look at and for a native tri-state area resident to identify various neighborhoods.

Early 1970s New York City was not a pretty site and the Wall Street area and garment district where the riveting action culminates are terrific.

Delightful is the scene involving Jean Stapleton as a no-nonsense secretary. Forever remembered as Edith Bunker on the television series All in the Family, it’s great fun seeing her in Klute and remembering she appeared in films before her television success.

Klute (1971) is a taut, superior thriller that sometimes is a bit too complex but that scores a winning run with its marriage of a character study and intelligent writing.

Thanks to Fonda and Sutherland, and a screenplay that bravely goes left of center when it easily could have gone straightforward, Klute is a memorable piece of cinema.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Actress-Jane Fonda (won), Best Original Screenplay

The Last Picture Show-1971

The Last Picture Show-1971

Director Peter Bogdanovich

Starring Timothy Bottoms, Jeff Bridges, Cybill Sheperd

Scott’s Review #1,349

Reviewed March 9, 2023

Grade: A

1971 was a great year in American cinema from The French Connection to Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory to Fiddler on the Roof to Dirty Harry. The list goes on and on.

The brilliantly filmed and directed The Last Picture Show is easily ensconced in the year’s top ten featuring an embarrassment of riches across the board. Important to promote is the successful use of the dusty setting and time which is the film’s secret sauce.

Peter Bogdanovich crafts a dreary coming-of-age tale of small-town life in landlocked Texas. The film is loosely based on a 1966 novel of the same name written by Larry McMurtry.

The film includes many songs by Hank Williams Sr. and other country & Western and 1950s popular music recording artists to reflect the era.

Most of the townsfolk are bored to tears in the windswept hamlet of Anarene, Texas. Their saving grace is a local cinema (the picture show) run by the popular Sam the Lion (Ben Johnson) which is about to close its doors forever.

Others frequent the café run by sultry waitress Genevieve (Eileen Brennan) who knows everyone’s business.

The gossip and scandals run wild throughout town following several principal characters and their trials and tribulations. High school students Sonny (Timothy Bottoms) and Duane (Jeff Bridges) lust after flirty Jacy Farrow (Cybill Shepherd) while trying to figure out their futures.

Sonny also finds time for an affair with depressed housewife Ruth Popper (Cloris Leachman), twenty years his senior, who is married to the school gym teacher, Coach Popper (Bill Thurman), who may be gay.

The year is 1951 when the Korean War is broiling and the once profitable oil town is in major decline.

Bogdanovich’s apt camerawork, shot in black and white, is central to the film and the winning recipe (well, one of them). If The Last Picture Show were shot in color or worse yet, colorized, it would detract from the proper mood of sadness.

The exterior scenes involve swirling dust and wide-angle shots of the main street often enough to relay a comparison to a ghost town especially as events go along. There are also some sequences involving vehicles or highway scenes conjuring up thoughts of escape or departure.

The other key ingredient is the ensemble of characters led by exceptional acting. Sonny is the handsome lead character who has a lifetime ahead of him and is the kindest of all the players. His all-American good looks infuse a vulnerability to the character especially revealed during scenes with Sam, his mentor, and his friend Billy.

Other quiet scenes reveal much about the supporting characters. Ruth sadly hangs the wash on her clothesline looking worn and weary while Genevieve grills a cheeseburger in the café, cigarette dangling and her once youthful aspirations slipping away.

Leachman and Johnson, both Academy Award winners in the supporting categories, deserve their awards. Successful at portraying their anger in quiet ways they also both have dignity and self-worth making their characters complex and revered.

The heartiest scenes belong to the younger set as they deal with simmering sexuality and hopes for college. Jacy experiments with sex, even sleeping with the man who her mother Lois (Burstyn) is having an affair with.

Shepherd also gives Jacy vulnerability as she awkwardly strips off her clothes during a pool party encouraged by a handsome boy she hopes to impress. At times, she is childish, other times a selfish bitch. It’s mentioned that her family is wealthy so the assumption is that she is spoiled.

The 1950s usually provides a level of nostalgia and good, old-fashioned, carefree Americana. The Last Picture Show (1971) thanks to the flawless direction and screenwriting of Bogdanovich and McMurtry instead paints a perfect portrait of misspent youth and shattered dreams.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Peter Bogdanovich, Best Supporting Actor-Ben Johnson (won), Jeff Bridges, Best Supporting Actress-Cloris Leachman (won), Ellen Burstyn, Best Screenplay-Based on Material from Another Medium, Best Cinematography

The Omega Man-1971

The Omega Man-1971

Director Boris Sagal

Starring Charlton Heston, Rosalind Cash

Scott’s Review #1,168

Reviewed August 2, 2021

Grade: B

Watching a film in 2021 about a global pandemic that was made in 1971 conjures many interesting nuances and comparisons and brings fresh relevance to the story.

Throw in vaccinated versus non-vaccinated debate and the similarities are downright eerie.

Given this relevance, I wish that I had found The Omega Man (1971) more engaging than I did. It’s not a bad watch and delivers a very progressive interracial romance and cool exterior scenes of downtown Los Angeles but the story doesn’t live up to the potential that the premise would suggest.

I kept thinking of Charlton Heston, who stars, in two of his other science fiction roles- Planet of the Apes (1968) and Soylent Green (1973), also directed by Omega Man director, Boris Sagal. Planet of the Apes is of course a classic.

In the first scene, Robert Neville (Heston) wanders the streets of Los Angeles. We quickly surmise that he is the last man left on earth. Armed with an experimental vaccine for the disease that’s turned everyone into light-averse zombies, he fights a biological war, roaming the empty streets by day and fighting off the mutated creatures at night.

The premise immediately reminded me of a famous Twilight Zone episode.

On paper, the storyline sounds fascinating with many possible directions it could go in and nuances to explore. Sadly, the direction that Sagal chooses to go in feels lackluster and dull.

Neville hunts and kills as many members of “the Family”, a cult of plague victims who were turned into nocturnal albino mutants as he can. The Family in turn seeks to destroy all technology and kill Neville, who has become a symbol of the science they blame for humanity’s downfall.

They try to kill each other but “the Family’s” motivations and reasoning make little sense. If they destroy technology what will they do? And why not just get the vaccination? These bits may have been explained but I didn’t take notice.

The parallels between the film and the Covid-19 pandemic of 2020-2021 and perhaps onward are uncanny. Maybe the modern unvaccinated will turn into creepy-looking creatures with pale glowing eyes? One can only hope.

There is also a hokey idea of Neville believing that extending his immunity to others may be possible by creating a serum from his blood.

I didn’t feel very engaged by the story but I was very interested in the romance between Neville and Lisa, played by Rosalind Cash. Lisa is a black woman who arrives on the scene with her infected and dying brother.

For 1971, having a mainstream interracial romance is a huge win for diversity and inclusion though the film stops short of having the pair consummate their relationship. This is quite conspicuous. There is also not a whole lot of chemistry between Heston and Cash but I was rooting for them anyway. It is thought that their kiss is the first interracial kiss in cinema history.

Suffice it to say the conclusion isn’t very satisfying but I’ll leave it right there to avoid spoilers.

The science fiction genre is a tough one to tackle. The bar is set pretty high with 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) the greatest science fiction film ever made. Too many times the story is hokey or not imaginative enough and that’s what makes The Omega Man lose some points.

Parts are inspiring and parts are goofy but the progressive slant makes The Omega Man (1971) an above-par cinema experience. The unexpected parallels to a global situation some fifty years later are remarkable in themselves.

Sunday Bloody Sunday-1971

Sunday Bloody Sunday-1971

Director John Schlesinger

Starring Glenda Jackson, Peter Finch, Murray Head

Scott’s Review #1,062

Reviewed September 15, 2020

Grade: A

Whether it’s the late 1960s style with British sophistication or the ahead-of-its-time subject matter, John Schlesinger’s Sunday Bloody Sunday (1971) is a brazen and mature piece of filmmaking.

With fantastic acting mostly on the part of Glenda Jackson and Peter Finch, the film is subdued enough to contain the drama while letting the underlying plot marinate and flourish rather than being forced or overdone.

That’s not to say Sunday Bloody Sunday is an easy watch. The main characters stew and simmer rather than explode as the audience comes to grips with their feelings, emotions, and motivations as painful as they can be.

Schlesinger offers the complexities of the characters as we get inside their heads during multiple scenes as cameras carefully pan in on their facial expressions. The intention is to read their minds or think we know what they are thinking.

The three characters featured are Alex (Glenda Jackson), a divorced and restless recruitment worker, a young, free-spirited artist, Bob (Murray Head), and a gay, Jewish, doctor named Daniel (Peter Finch).

Bob openly dates both Alex and Daniel, who are aware of the existence of the other and even have common friends. Instead of scheming against the other in hopes of poisoning their character with Bob, they deal with acceptance and a host of other emotions.

A triangle ensues, though not one with a clear couple to root for, nor is it clear who we want to root for. Sunday Bloody Sunday is not that trite or simplistic and this is the beauty of the film.

Each character can be analyzed for individual motivations, peculiarities, and desires that sometimes overlap. The added perk of one character being straight, one character being bisexual, and one character being gay only adds flavor and lustful desire. Sunday Bloody Sunday is a character study if ever there was one.

Screenwriter, Penelope Gilliatt, writes a piece so bristling with the unpredictability that the characters and situations are deep and troubling. My favorite character is Daniel, the most adjusted of the three, but a character who would typically be written as the most maladjusted.

Schlesinger had directed the brilliant Midnight Cowboy (1969) two mere years earlier, a film that depicted gay characters as troubled and self-hating. Gilliatt crafts Daniel as confident, successful, and masculine, avoiding all stereotypes.

I immediately had thoughts of Ken Russell’s masterpiece, Women in Love, made only one year earlier in 1970, and starring Jackson. Featuring four characters rather than only three, both films are British and feature the complexities of sexual orientation, jealousy, and loneliness.

Women in Love is a slightly better film, but only by a small margin, probably because there is one additional character to consider. Both explore then barely touched territory when it was still taboo to explore homosexuality in film.

Adorable is a scene at a Bar Mitzvah given to Daniel’s nephew. As the merriment commences several women are bound to be interested in Daniel, what with him being a successful doctor. He doesn’t have any interest naturally but politely makes small talk with one woman.

The scene is so natural and at ease that it is wonderful and reaffirming to see a gay character treated with such dignity and richness, his problems not being a result of being gay but of being a human being.

Daniel and Alex compete for Bob’s affection but in a polite way. Instead of hating each other, they hate the situation. Bob is not the nicest guy in the world so the question can be raised as to why they both feel the way they do about him.

But this hardly matters when the heart wants what it wants.

The most interesting and realistic scenes occur when each couple lies in bed together or makes small talk over a meal. This offers a glimpse of what day-to-day treasures they each could enjoy.

Those in the mood for a film rife with emotion and psychologically complex feelings wrapped inside a good drama will find Sunday Bloody Sunday (1971) a pure treat. Trimmings like glimpses of the gorgeous city of London lend themselves to added nuances.

Each time this film is viewed it could easily be watched from the perspective of either Alex, Bob, or Daniel.

Oscar Nominations: Best Director-John Schlesinger, Best Actor-Peter Finch, Best Actress-Glenda Jackson, Best Original Screenplay

The Blood on Satan’s Claw-1971

The Blood on Satan’s Claw-1971

Director Piers Haggard

Starring Patrick Wymark, Linda Hayden

Scott’s Review #1,050

Reviewed August 7, 2020

Grade: B

I am always up for a good British horror film, with a creepy musical score, satanic elements, and eclectic, good actors. Especially embraceable are offerings from the late 1960s and early 1970s.

The Blood on Satan’s Claw (1971), also released as Satan’s Skin, is very reminiscent of both Witchfinder General (1968) and The Wicker Man (1973), the three often lumped together in a small, brief sub-genre termed folk horror.

The film is not high art nor is it intended to be. Taking itself too seriously would ruin the experience.

Instead, a gruesome low-budget offering is just what the doctor ordered for late-night sipping cocktails or doing your preferred enlightenment or sedative.

The elements are all there- thunder and lightning, a perfect score, and English countryside.

The Blood on Satan’s Claw would have been dynamite if the choice to cast horror legend Peter Cushing or Christopher Lee came to fruition, but Cushing’s wife was dying of cancer and Lee wanted too high a salary, or so the story goes.

Anyway, Patrick Wymark was awarded the lead role of a village judge. The actor had a penchant for booze and had to be watched closely.

Sadly, he died soon after filming wrapped.

Those expecting a concise plot will be disappointed. Reportedly, the script was changed and changed and changed in a dizzying fashion before filming commenced. Some plot points and characters are introduced only to be unceremoniously dropped or forgotten.

Little wonder why the story confused me to no end.

Many characters have strange reaction shots as if they are reacting to different scenes. No matter though, the film is a good time despite the inconsistencies.

In a nutshell, a cute plowman Ralph (Barry Andrews) uncovers a hideously deformed skull with one gouging eye and strange fur. When he reports his finding to the local judge (Wymark), the skeptical man is disbelieving especially when the skull disappears before he lays eyes on it.

The village and its inhabitants quickly succumb to a group of teenage devil-worshipers led by beautiful but fiendish Angel Blake (Linda Hayden) who begins to perform blood sacrifices to bring the skull back to life.

Director, Piers Haggard, who also did some scriptwriting along with Robert Wynne-Simmons, does a great job with adding the appropriate elements to create a satisfactory mood.

The ancient setting of early-eighteenth-century England is always a juicy horror add-on since the unfamiliar time adds mystique.

The cinematography is gorgeous with lavish fields and stone buildings. I could have done without the laughably bad wigs the male actors were forced to wear, though.

Hayden is the standout for me.

A dead ringer for The Brady Bunch’s Maureen McCormick, only British, mixes deadly with beautiful in an underappreciated role. The actress was at that time a sex symbol appearing in other horror film treats such as Taste the Blood of Dracula (1970) and Vampira (1974).

As the teenage ringleader, her best scene is when she serves as a temptress to the local Reverend (Anthony Ainley). She seductively disrobes and confidently walks over to the intimidated man offering full-frontal nudity and the obvious daydreams of schoolboys everywhere.

Those not turned off by witch hunts, devil fur shavings, or characters sawing off their limbs will find The Blood on Satan’s Claw (1971) a real treat.

The film will please those classic horror fans expecting what the expected is in British horror which is a good thing. The demonic and religious trimmings mix well with a cast that is classically trained with most appearing in similarly themed horror films.

The story is weak and haphazard but the film is recommended to just enjoy the moment with.

Death in Venice-1971

Death in Venice-1971

Director Luchino Visconti

Starring Dirk Bogarde, Romolo Valli

Scott’s Review #1,014

Reviewed April 22, 2020

Grade: A

Death in Venice (1971) is a haunting and tragic story of a depressed middle-aged man who becomes obsessed with a fourteen-year-old Polish boy while on holiday in Venice.

The story on the surface is dark and dour and not for the judgmental or the closed-minded. With a deeper dive and a haunting musical score, the film provides beauty and impressionism.

The film is based on the original novella Death in Venice, written by German author Thomas Mann, and published in 1912 as Der Tod in Venedig.

Gustav von Aschenbach (Dirk Bogarde) is a lonely composer who travels to Venice for health reasons and a recipe for recovery. His maladies are unclear at the start but are assumed to be sent to the picturesque city as a form of therapy.

While enjoying a tranquil holiday, he spots and becomes obsessed with the stunning, youthful beauty of Tadzio (Bjorn Andresen), who is staying with his family at the luxurious Grand Hôtel des Bains, just as Gustav is.

Their encounters run rampant as they are viewed by the audience from afar but never speak to each other.

This is the brilliance of Death in Venice. A more standard approach may have been to make the story more forceful.

If Gustav had approached, harassed, or even molested Tadzio, the direction of the film would have vastly changed, and he would have been deemed a pervert.

Suddenly the film would have been about a pedophile preying on a youngster, rather than incorporating a beautiful subtext of longing and unfulfilled passion.

The masterful classical numbers that open and close the film help to achieve this mindset.

The controversial subject matter, still taboo by today’s progressive standards, is not gratuitous but is quite obsessive. Worthy of mention is that Gustav’s plight begins harmless enough as he appreciates a beautiful image, almost like gazing at a sculpture- think Michelangelo’s David- since we are in Italy.

But when he begins to follow Tadzio and see him more and more his desperation increases as his health deteriorates. For a while, it is unclear whether the boy even realizes he is an object of affection. It is Gustav’s feelings and emotions that are most explored.

As a side story, the city of Venice is gripped by a cholera epidemic, and the city authorities do not inform the holiday-makers of the problem for fear that they will flee the vital city.

In 2020, with the vicious COVID-19 pandemic gripping the world with savage ferocity, this classic film takes on a whole new importance. When the Venice officials downplay the epidemic as tourists increasingly fall ill, a modern realism is conjured to the audience.

Death in Venice, as the title should make clear, is not a love story, otherwise, it would be called Love in Venice. Gustav’s lust for Tadzio is unrequited. Neither is Gustav’s sexuality clear, though he is assumed to be bisexual.

In one of the film’s saddest scenes, also the finale, Gustav lounges on the sandy beach in ill health dressed in an improper white suit. He sees Tadzio playfully frolicking with an older boy and afterward walks away and turns back to look at Gustavo.

As Tadzio outreaches his arms toward the water, Gustav does the same as if he is enveloping the boy. The moment is breathtaking.

Many symbolic and meaningful scenes occur like when Gustav visits a barber who insists he will return his customer to his youth. The results are ghastly.

Dyeing his grey hair black whitening his face and reddening his lips to try and make him look younger leaves a macabre and somber image of a man feebly attempting to turn back the hands of time, something all of us can relate to. His heavily made-up face is meant to hide his insecurities.

Incorporating an ingenious mix of beauty, tragedy, obsession, and loneliness, Italian director, Luchino Visconti crafts a brilliant and painful dissection of human emotion.

The subject matter of Death in Venice (1971) will not appeal to all viewers, but those brave enough to traverse the sometimes-rocky waters will find an underlying treasure and a meaningful cinematic experience.

Oscar Nominations: Best Costume Design

Straw Dogs-1971

Straw Dogs-1971

Director Sam Peckinpah

Starring Dustin Hoffman, Susan George

Scott’s Review #733

Reviewed March 19, 2018

Grade: A

Straw Dogs (1971) is famed director, Sam Peckinpah’s, most startling and most controversial film.  Hardly an easy watch, it will conjure up both disturbing and uneasy reactions but is a work of art- teetering on an all-out art film.

Viewers will cringe during intense scenes, but will also marvel at the film mastery of this classic, brought on a whirlwind roller coaster ride as story elements spiral out of control to a frenetic and powerful climax.

Intellectual American mathematician, David Sumner (Dustin Hoffman), moves with his sexy British wife, Amy (Susan George), to a Cornish countryside- the town in which she grew up where they proceed to encounter problems, both within their marriage, and external factors, as an angry mob of blue-collar workmen, threaten their home life.

When non-violent David is pushed to the limit, questions of morality are brought to light, as Amy faces her demons and bouts with brutality and victimization.

The film, made in 1971, pushes the envelope greatly in its display of violence.

Several years earlier, 1967’s Bonnie and Clyde, and Peckinpah’s own The Wild Bunch (1969), really were the films that got the ball rolling, but Straw  Dogs continues the trend of the brutal violence that overtook American cinema in those days.

While watching the film for the second time I was struck hard by the feeling that I was watching something important.

Amy’s rape scene is the toughest scene of all to watch for the sheer way in which it can be interpreted. Later, when Amy replays the scene in her mind, the audience is forced to endure the experience over again.

Not content to only include the rape scene, Peckinpah wants the viewer to dissect the scene- the fact that Amy is assaulted by not one, but two men, and reacts differently to each of them, is the key here.

The scene is complex in that, Venner, the first assailant is hunky and presumed to be a former beau, and she eventually relents to his advances, but does she enjoy the act? When Scutt enters the picture, however, things turn from tender and ambiguous to violent and dirty.

Undoubtedly an influence to director Quentin Tarantino is the final sequence of the film- a scene fraught with tension, violence, and grit.

Now trapped in their house amid a mob of angry, drunk men, hell-bent on revenge, David and Amy must both bond with each other and match antics with the men.

I experienced visions of 2015’s The Hateful Eight through the claustrophobic, cabin-like setting, and the quick edits that Peckinpah successfully uses throughout the entire film.

A sad scene, and at least a portion of the reason for the town folk’s rage, is a scene reminiscent of Frankenstein when a hulking and mentally challenged man accidentally harms a young girl. Not knowing his strength and meaning to protect the girl instead of killing her, the menfolk of the town respond in a nightmarish and witch-hunt manner.

Suddenly, David becomes the defender and protector of this man.

David’s change in character is interesting and the great Hoffman adds layers and layers of complexities to the role. At first a peaceful man, due to circumstances, he soon becomes the assailant, creating traps and weapons intent on maiming his prey.

Hardly a violent man, this change of character is evidenced as we earlier see David nurse a wounded bird.

In addition to Hoffman’s traditionally great acting performance, Susan George succeeds in providing the perfect mixture of bitchiness, spoiled brat tantrums, and later, guilt-ridden angst, and fear.

The villains are perfectly cast and believable as bored, simple-minded, and horny, small-town boys just itching for trouble.

Lush is the gorgeous United Kingdom countryside featured in Straw Dogs, as frequent exterior scenes are shot, revealing lavish and plush mountainous areas- the sweeping beauty of the landscape counterbalancing the brutality revealed in other sections of the film.

Mixing super quick editing with a dark, compelling screenplay, with underlying themes of questioning one’s manhood, Straw Dogs is a provocative and edgy tale of violence and revenge in a small town, that gives new meaning to the fear of “home invasion” and feeling vulnerable.

Thanks to a great cast and lots of other facets, Straw Dogs (1971) is a timeless (and brutal) treasure.

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Dramatic Score

Dirty Harry-1971

Dirty Harry-1971

Director Don Siegel

Starring Clint Eastwood, Harry Guardino

Top 100 Films #86

Scott’s Review #443

445522

Reviewed July 4, 2016

Grade: A

Dirty Harry (1971) is a classic crime drama that became a signature role for Clint Eastwood as the title character, a character he has played four more times.

Dirty Harry set the tone for the plethora of crime thrillers and police action films that filled theaters throughout the 1970s and 1980s. This film still holds up very well and is a masterpiece of the cat and mouse/detective genre.

Quiet, and controlled, but filled with anger below the surface (we learn his wife was killed by a drunk driver), Harry Callahan is a tough cop in San Francisco who has seen it all. He is a red-blooded American good guy, though is brooding and has a mind of his own, oftentimes disagreeing with his superiors and their rules.

He epitomizes good versus evil.

A vicious killer named Scorpio (based on the real-life Zodiac killer) is on the loose, having killed two people already. His motives are unclear, but that is rather unimportant. What is important is that he threatens to kill one person per day unless his demands of $100,000 are met.

Harry is immediately assigned to the case despite his reputation for being difficult and violent. This leads to a cat-and-mouse game between Harry and Scorpio in Harry’s pursuit of the criminal.

Scorpio is played by Andy Robinson, who is a fantastic villain- perhaps one of the most frightening in film history. His dirty blonde locks, yet angelic face, combined with maniacal facial expressions make his portrayal quite frightening.

He is a sniper so he is continually perched on rooftops seeking his next victim. As he watches a couple eating ice cream in the park or a woman swimming in a rooftop pool, we feel a sense of voyeurism and dread.

His disturbing sense of humor and sadistic personality make him quite scary.

The film succeeds in large part because of its grit and violence.  And it is a very masculine film. Harry is a take-no-prisoners kind of guy and he is hell-bent on stopping Scorpio from killing- no matter what.

In a very effective scene, Harry chases Scorpio to a vast football field and uses torture to elicit a confession from Scorpio. It is a bloody and intense scene, but quite necessary to who Harry is.

Of course, this tactic backfires as Scorpio is released from the hospital and set free. This leads to a further feud between the two men.

A bonus of Dirty Harry, and one aspect that gives so much authenticity, is the on-location setting of San Francisco. From the Golden Gate bridge to the illustrious mountains outside of the city and the Pacific Ocean, these elements give a dash of realism to an already gritty film. Chinatown and Dolores Park are also featured.

Highlighting all of this is a sequence where Scorpio forces Harry to go from locale to locale on foot in part of a wicked game to save a victim.

Harry’s famous lines as he points his gun at the perpetrators and mocks them by asking them if five or six bullets in his gun are now legendary as is his “Do I feel lucky? Well, do you, punk?”

On the surface a bit silly and gimmicky, these catchphrases somehow still work.

The school bus finale as Harry and Scorpio once again square off is great. As Scorpio hijacks a bus filled with grammar school students, he tricks the students, unaware of his intentions, by engaging them in children’s song sing-alongs as the harried bus driver drives out of the city.

When one child catches wind of the situation, Scorpio turns nasty, scaring the children into a frenzy.

Dirty Harry (1971) is a classic cop film that I never tire of watching. For the genre, it is as good as it gets and holds up well. After all of these years, it is tough to disassociate Clint Eastwood from the role of “Dirty Harry”.

The French Connection-1971

The French Connection-1971

Director William Friedkin

Starring Gene Hackman, Roy Scheider

Top 100 Films #69

Scott’s Review #342

60011660

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

The French Connection had the notable distinction of being the first R-rated film to win the coveted Best Picture Oscar back in 1971.

This praise, similar to The Silence of the Lambs being the first horror film to win Best Picture in 1991, is well worth pointing out and is quite honorary.

The film succeeds, both for myself and other critics, because of the unique style of the camerawork, shot documentary-style, and use of quick edits.

It is much more intricate in every way than the traditional crime thriller.

Gene Hackman stars as the feisty detective, Jimmy “Popeye” Doyle, who along with his partner, Buddy “Cloudy” Russo, (Scheider) are determined to crack the case of a huge heroin smuggling syndicate from France.

The narcotics are flowing into New York City and the duo is determined to get to the bottom of the drug ring, figuring out who is the mastermind and defeating their foe.

The primary culprit is a suave French drug lord named Alain Charnier, brilliantly played by Fernando Rey.

Throughout the film, the action is non-stop, traversing throughout Manhattan and Brooklyn, via subway, and car, as Popeye becomes more and more obsessed with the case.

Director William Friedkin, who also directed the legendary 1973 film, The Exorcist, deserves a heap of praise for creating a film of this caliber. The French Connection can be enjoyed by all and is well beyond the limitations of a “guy film”- it is much more than that.

The editing and frenetic pacing work wonders for the film, all the while not ruining the experience or overshadowing the good plot. Quite simply, the film is a chase across New York City.

Friedkin distinguishes the boroughs by making Manhattan seem sophisticated and stylish, and Brooklyn dirty, grizzled, and drug-laden.

The settings are perfect.

The best scene in the film is the well-known car chase throughout New York City. Popeye is determined not to lose his man, the man riding in a subway on an elevated platform. Popeye steals a car and proceeds to chase the subway narrowly missing pedestrians, including a woman with a baby carriage, as he recklessly weaves in and out of traffic at a high speed, to keep pace with the train.

This is a phenomenal scene as the excitement and tension continue to build.

The conclusion of the film and the final scene is cynical and also leaves the audience perplexed and unsure of what has transpired.

The French Connection is open to good discussion and even interpretation, a novel aspect of the action film.

Providing a tremendous glimpse into 1970s Manhattan and Brooklyn, The French Connection is an exciting film that oozes with thrills, car chases, and a good story.

The film is unique in style and still holds up incredibly well- one of my favorites in the action genre.

Oscar Nominations: 5 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-Richard Friedkin (won), Best Actor-Gene Hackman (won), Best Supporting Actor-Roy Scheider, Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium (won), Best Sound, Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing (won)

Diamonds Are Forever-1971

Diamonds Are Forever-1971

Director Guy Hamilton

Starring Sean Connery, Jill St. John

Top 100 Films #57

Scott’s Review #328

60000705

Reviewed January 6, 2016

Grade: A

Despite Diamonds Are Forever (1971) being one of the lower-rated James Bond films, this is actually one of my favorite films of all time and many would disagree with me.

Some say Sean Connery phoned this performance in, some say there was little chemistry between him and Jill St. John and tension-filled the sets leading to a sub-par offering, but I think this is a great film.

I love the Las Vegas locale, the bright lights, flashy costumes, and a ritzy underbelly- and the Vegas car chase is amazing.

A bright, shiny Ford Mustang takes center stage throughout the sequence, and if one looks closely, one will realize that nearly all the cars are Ford- fun fact!

The title song by Shirley Bassey is great- sultry and stylish only enhanced by the glitzy setting. One immediately imagines the film oozing with diamonds as it does.

The villains are interesting and Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd were the first openly gay Bond villains, which, in 1971 was groundbreaking.

Yes, they are evil and slightly silly, but what a risky and surprising blatant scene to see the gentlemen holding hands.

St. John is a sophisticated and intelligent Bond girl and the action in this film is plenty.

Diamonds Are Forever (1971) contains all the elements for an enjoyable Bond experience.

Oscar Nominations: Best Sound

A Clockwork Orange-1971

A Clockwork Orange-1971

Director Stanley Kubrick

Starring Malcolm McDowell

Top 100 Films #9     Top 10 Disturbing Films #7

Scott’s Review #295

383466

Reviewed December 11, 2015

Grade: A

A Clockwork Orange (1971) is a groundbreaking Stanley Kubrick film and my personal favorite in his collection, more than one of which appears on my Top 100 Favorite Films list.

Adapted from the 1962 Anthony Burgess novel and thought to be unable to make it into a film, it becomes a psychedelic, creative, and fascinating experience from start to finish.

Bizarre and extremely thought-provoking, Kubrick tells the story of a London sociopath delinquent living in futuristic London, and the strange behavior modifications performed on him after he is apprehended by the police, in an attempt to “reform” him and transition him to be a useful member of society.

The film delves into such social and insightful themes such as morality and psychology and questions these weighty topics.

Interspersed with classical music and wonderful, colorful sets, A Clockwork Orange is a masterpiece in bizarre artistic cinema.

Alex DeLarge loves classical music (specifically Beethoven), violence, and hanging out with friends. He constantly skips school, beats people up, and parties with his friends. His pet snake is his best friend, and his parents seem afraid of him.

Finally arrested after murdering an odd lady with dozens of cats, Alex is sent away to prison where he volunteers for an experimental “Ludovico” technique, which Alex assumes is a “get out of jail free” card.

What transpires next is a freakish and uncomfortable experience for Alex.

The film contains startling and disturbing scenes throughout- when Alex and his team of “droogs” become inebriated from a concoction of milk laced with drugs and embark on an evening of self-proclaimed ultra-violence, they drive to the country where they break into wealthy author F. Alexander’s house and beat him, crippling him for life.

They rape his wife while forcing him to watch, all the while Alex happily sings “Singin’ in the Rain” timing the beats of the song to acts of violence.

The brutality and creativity of this scene are mesmerizing and certainly unforgettable.

We the audience might despise a character like Alex, however, sympathy is felt for him as his “reformation” begins. A disturbing scene, which is forever embedded in my mind, involves the attaching of a contraption forcing Alex’s eyelids wide open while he watches violent scenes and is administered a drug to make him sick, thereby associating the violence with illness.

He becomes psychologically screwed up.

Alex (thanks to a wonderful portrayal by Malcolm McDowell) is charismatic and humorous and, in some warped way, quite likable to the audience, despite his devious ways.

A Clockwork Orange continues to disturb me after multiple viewings- who can forget the sinister grin that Alex wears and the creepy eyelash with mascara that he possesses?

The film sends an interesting message about human nature as Alex turns from predator to the hunted. We ask, “are human beings naturally prone to violence”?

The direction of the film is breathtaking- the weird colors, the (as traditional with Stanley Kubrick)  long-shot camera angles, and the intense musical crescendos.

And the genre of classical music is a wonderful and ominous choice- almost adding a level of sophistication to Alex and the violence.

The weird supporting characters (Alex’s parents, the probation officer, and his parent’s roommate) and the suddenly fast-forwarded sex scenes were unheard of for their time.

Immensely creative and unconventional film making with a moral message and questions about society and mankind, A Clockwork Orange (1971) is a groundbreaking and fantastic, trippy experience.

A masterpiece from top to bottom.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Director-Stanley Kubrick, Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium, Best Film Editing

Harold and Maude-1971

Harold and Maude-1971

Director Hal Ashby

Starring Bud Cort, Ruth Gordon

Top 100 Films #59

Scott’s Review #208

60000591

Reviewed December 30, 2014

Grade: A

Harold and Maude (1971) is the bravest and most left-of-center film that I have ever had the pleasure of viewing. A subject matter so taboo that it had never before been explored in cinema and, to my knowledge, has not since.

The film challenges so many mainstream views of aging, sex, and relationships.

Ruth Gordon and Bud Cort give performances of a lifetime.

The film tells the story of an unhappy, wealthy teenager named Harold (Cort) whose mother- hilariously played by Vivian Pickles- is a cold socialite attempting to reform Harold of his rebellious adolescent behavior.

Harold frequently plays suicide pranks on her and the numerous females she tries to set him up with, reducing them to tearful exits from the family mansion in frightened hysterics.

Obsessed with attending funerals for fun, one day Harold meets Maude (Gordon), an elderly woman, at a funeral, and it turns out that both share the same fascination, but for vastly different reasons as the story shows.

They embark on a tender romance despite their age difference of over sixty years.

In many ways, Maude is the real adolescent of the film, which I love. It is a role reversal of sorts. On the cusp of age eighty, she has a pure zest for life, living each minute as if it was her last, unconcerned with the consequences of her actions- she is a true free spirit.

She gleefully steals cars that happen to be parked on the street and her erratic driving is comically brilliant.

Harold becomes the more responsible one despite being the tender age of only nineteen. He cares for Maude and her shocking revelation towards the end of the film floors Harold.

It will also shock the audience.

Harold and Maude deal with death but the film is not a downer. It is hilarious at times, brilliantly written, and Maude, a Nazi prison camp survivor, does not fear death- she has seen her share of it and almost embraces it.

Harold is just beginning his life and the contrast of the characters and their growing bond is what works best in this film.

The aforementioned Vivian Pickles knocks it out of the park with her portrayal of Harold’s mother- her comic wit and timing are excellent- she callously hosts a dinner party and boasts of her travels to France to the guests while Harold sits ignored, bored, and depressed, staring at his mother in disbelief.

He wants nothing to do with her or her trivial lifestyle. She makes an unimportant phone call while Harold dangles from the ceiling in a faux suicide attempt- clearly a cry for attention from his mother.

This is a total black comedy.

The implied intimacy between Harold and Maude was too much for many viewers in 1971. I find it sweet and quite tastefully done. They simply fall in love and it feels wonderful for both of them.

I would be remiss for not mentioning the wonderful, lively soundtrack by Cat Stevens.

Edgy, laugh out loud, unusual, and witty are words to describe Harold and Maude (1971)- one of the most intelligent comedies in film history.

Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory-1971

Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory-1971

Director Mel Stuart

Starring Gene Wilder, Jack Albertson

Top 100 Films #17

Scott’s Review #206

60020949

Reviewed December 18, 2014

Grade: A

More than just a children’s movie, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (1971) is a terrific, imaginative, fantasy film that is timeless and meant for all ages to enjoy.

The mastery and creativity of the sets and art direction are astounding and the story is sweet, whimsical, and capturing. Often with children’s movies, we are treated to dumb or contrived stories that will entertain five-year-olds, but make adults bored or cringe.

Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory is none of the above. It is intelligent and filled with magic and heart.

Charlie Bucket is a poor child whose mother washes clothes for a living. Along with his four bedridden grandparents, they live a meager existence in a small cottage somewhere in Europe.

Particularly close with his Grandpa Joe, the two of them become obsessed with a contest held by mysterious Willy Wonka, the owner of an enormous chocolate factory nearby.

The contest consists of five “Golden tickets” being hidden in Wonka bars. The five lucky winners will receive a lifetime supply of candy and a tour inside the long-since-closed chocolate factory.

After a series of circumstances, Charlie obtains one of the tickets and the adventure begins.

The build-up to the trip into Willy Wonka’s factory is gripping- mainly because the viewer knows that a magical treat is in store and is filled with curiosity- what will the chocolate factory look like? What is Mr. Wonka like?

The four other winners- Augustus Gloop, Veruca Salt, Violet Beauregarde, and Mike Teevee are all unique and creatively written characters- all spoiled brats in their way, so Charlie is the “normal” child and has a true rooting value to him.

As the five children, along with a designated parent- or in Charlie’s case, Grandparent, begin their journey throughout the chocolate factory the audience is treated to a psychedelic experience with fantastic sets- a river made of chocolate, an entirely edible garden, lickable wallpaper, a bubble room, and a frightening riverboat.

The film is bright and colorful within the walls of the factory which perfectly contrasts Charlie’s dreary existence in the outside world.

As the four bratty children meet their fates in joyfully imaginative ways- gum chewer Violet blows up like a blueberry after chewing experimental Wonka gum that she is warned not to, Veruca is deemed rotten after throwing a fit and topples down a garbage chute.

The film is breathtaking and imaginative, filled with wonderment.

Gene Wilder plays the role of Wonka as over-the-top and it works tremendously.

All of the child actors play their roles competently as each character is distinguished from the others.

I love the scary riverboat tunnel scene as it is frightening, psychedelic, and magnificent. I also love the contrast between the enchanting colorful second half to the bleakness of the first. The sets are some of my favorites in their lavishness.

Specifically, the relationship between Charlie and Grandpa Joe is wonderful. Grandpa Joe is a father figure to Charlie, but so is Willy Wonka in a completely different way.

The greed of the children is also interesting and one hurrahs as each one gets his or her comeuppance.

The songs from the film are remarkable and quite cutting edge- each time one of the lucky five golden ticket winners meets their doom, the Oompa Loompas sing a tune that visually has weird shapes and colors-psychedelic and very hippy, of the late 1960’s-early 1970s era.

Other numbers such as “I’ve Got a Golden Ticket”, “Cheer up Charlie”, and “The Candy Man” are memorable.

A film for the ages, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (1971) is a celebration of creative film and quite cerebral at times and is far superior to most children’s fantasy/musical films.

Skip the 2005 remake starring Johnny Depp and enjoy the original.

Oscar Nominations: Best Scoring: Adaptation and Original Song Score

Fiddler on the Roof-1971

Fiddler on the Roof-1971

Director Norman Jewison

Starring Topol, Norma Crane, Rosalind Harris

Top 100 Films #91

Scott’s Review #123

499456

Reviewed July 21, 2014

Grade: A

Fiddler on the Roof is a fantastic musical from 1971 based on the popular stage version. It tells the story of a Russian Jewish family living in conflicted times before and during the RusRevolutionution.

The film has everything and is very well made, truly doing justice to the stage version. It contains dancing, drinking, festive parties, love, and sing-alongs. It also contains politics, hardships, and tragedy.

Led by the patriarch of the family, Teyve, played fantastically by Topol, he explains (often narrating directly to the audience, which is a goldmine in style) life in his Russian village with five daughters and no sons and an overbearing wife. They are a poor family and struggle to make ends meet.

They go through life with the help of song and dance and deal with such situations as romance- focusing mostly on the three oldest girls, and the political upheaval surrounding their country.

It is tough for a film version of a famous musical to be top-notch and even compare to the stage version, but the film is wonderful- “Tradition”, “Matchmaker”, and “If I Were a Rich Man” immediately stick in the viewer’s head.

The film has a rich, earthy feel to it, with lots of brown and grey colors. Russian history is explored giving it complexity and an educational quality instead of only a simple, feel-good experience. To put it simply- the story is layered and not one-note.

Politics, progressive thinking versus conservatism, and the generation gap are explored and the characters learn and adapt to a changing world, especially the parents.

One interesting aspect is the progressive onset of the Russian Revolution as it gradually drew closer.

Fiddler on the Roof is quite lengthy (179 minutes), but does not seem that long. This film (and play) is a marvel.

Oscar Nominations: 3 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Norman Jewison, Best Actor-Chaim Topol, Best Supporting Actor-Leonard Frey, Best Scoring: Adaptation and Original Song Score (won), Best Sound (won), Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography (won)