Tag Archives: Joseph Cotten

1977 Films, Adventure, Christopher Lee, Disaster, George Kennedy, Jack Lemmon, James Stewart, Joseph Cotten, Lee Grant, Maidie Norman, Olivia de Havilland, Rickie Sorensen

Airport ’77-1977

Leave a comment

Airport ’77-1977

Director Jerry Jameson

Starring Jack Lemmon, James Stewart, Olivia de Havilland

Scott’s Review #1,072

Reviewed October 20, 2020

Grade: B+

The word that springs to mind following a viewing of the disaster flick Airport ’77 (1977) is entertaining. Whether this is positive or negative depends on the viewer and what that viewer wants out of a film.

As a huge fan of the disaster genre, I was one satisfied customer though there is little to distinguish the film from other efforts. It is a more cohesive and professional-feeling effort than its predecessor, Airport ’75.

The fun is watching the cast, the grandiose list of who’s who of Hollywood heavyweights gracing the opening credits.

We wonder who will survive and who will not.

The star is the airplane. Showcased by way of both interiors and exteriors, the luxurious privately-owned Boeing 747-100 is a great highlight of the picture.

Owned by wealthy philanthropist Philip Stevens (James Stewart), the plane is packed with VIPs and priceless art traveling to his Florida estate for a party.

The wealthy travelers are drugged, and the aircraft is subsequently hijacked before crashing into the ocean in the Bermuda Triangle and sinking 100 feet, prompting the survivors to undertake a desperate struggle to live.

The airplane set is a feast for the eyes. A double-deck plane (naturally!) the plush green carpets and the spiral staircase complete with a robust bar stocked with every type of liquor imaginable are wonderful trimming.

It allows the viewer to forget all about the typical in-flight treats like their seat being kicked, a screaming baby, or a fat man snoring, and escape to the pleasures of champagne, caviar, and slippers.

Seriously, the sets are tremendous and worthy of their accolades.

Jerry Jameson, primarily a television director, sticks to a formulaic approach that makes the film look like a long television series. Think Murder, She Wrote, Dallas, or Dynasty at 30,000 feet.

I say this because the melodrama is sky-high (no pun intended) and situations arise between flight crew and passengers to create more tension than the crash itself.

The juiciest drama exists between husband and wife Martin (Christopher Lee) and Karen Wallace (Lee Grant). He flirts with women at the bar, drinks too much, and gets jealous. They squabble. You get the idea.

What a joy it is to see some of the stars on-screen together, specifically Stewart, Olivia de Havilland, and Joseph Cotten. As Nicholas, Cotten is a romantic match for de Havilland’s Emily Livingston, and they appear to be old friends.

Fans of classic cinema will undoubtedly associate him with Shadow of a Doubt (1943) and her with Gone with the Wind (1939) and to see the legendary stars side by side is darling, nearly worth the price of admission.

Stewart is perfectly cast as the rich and distinguished man eager to see the impending arrival of his estranged daughter and her son, hopeful of a happy reunion.

These delights are why I love this genre.

The actors teeter back and forth between phoning in their lines and enthusiastically having a ball with their respective roles. Sometimes it’s hard to tell which is which. I’ll bet the set was tension-free as everyone was earning a bundle of cash.

And why not? The budget is plentiful and filled with overabundance.

The plot is generally ludicrous as is to be expected. The thought that anyone, let alone nearly everyone, could survive a crash into the ocean and remain unscathed as it sinks to the depths of the water is beyond silly.

Suddenly, when all passengers conveniently emerge from their drug-induced stupor simultaneously, hysterics erupt which is quite humorous. As the water slowly begins to seep into the plane a frenzied effort to find a way out commences.

The last portion of the film involving a rescue crew coming to save the passengers is a disappointment, lacking much captivation.

Airport ’77 (1977) has all the elements its target viewer expects it to have. If the well-known cast were instead unknowns the crash peril and its following adventure were not danger personified, and the dramatic and romantic tensions left out, the film would be a disappointment.

The film is like sinking your teeth into a fattening, highly caloric Whopper from your favorite Burger King. It’s a guilty pleasure that you wouldn’t necessarily tell your health-conscious friends you get so much enjoyment from.

But, it’s fun, so why not indulge from time to time?

Oscar Nominations: Best Art Direction, Best Costume Design

1958 Films, Charlton Heston, Film noir, Janet Leigh, Joseph Cotten, Marlene Dietrich, Mercedes McCambridge, Orson Welles, Thriller, Zsa Zsa Gabor

Touch of Evil-1958

Leave a comment

Touch of Evil-1958

Director Orson Welles

Starring Charlton Heston, Janet Leigh

Scott’s Review #914

Reviewed July 2, 2019

Grade: A

Touch of Evil (1958) is a film noir directed by the legendary influential Hollywood director Orson Welles.

The film contains suspense, drama, and mystery but is to be mainly praised for visual treats to enhance the cinematic experience. The dark and foreboding thriller was revolutionary for the time of release and influenced many films of similar ilk in the years to come.

Robust and fraught with tension, the experience is marvelous and worthy of study for its many nuances.

Welles directs the work, stars in, and writes the screenplay, so his entire being is invested in the production and execution.

Known mainly for the legendary Citizen Kane (1940), a film that arguably changed the course of cinema with its direction and cinematography, Touch of Evil explores a different genre entirely. However, it keeps the excellent aspects of Welles’s loftier film intact, including the black-and-white element, resulting in a grand and dangerous crime-infused classic.

The screenplay was loosely based on the novel Badge of Evil by Whit Masterson.

The tension is ample from the onset as the humidity-drenched Mexico-United States border is the focal point. A car driven by a young couple is laced with a bomb and detonates as soon as they cross into U.S. territory.

In a hint of irony, Newlyweds Miguel “Mike” Vargas (Charlton Heston), a drug enforcement official in the Mexican government, and his wife Susie (Janet Leigh) pass the car several times on foot before the explosion.

An investigation ensues with the introduction of other characters, including Police Chief Pete Gould (Harry Shannon), District Attorney Adair (Ray Collins), and police captain Hank Quinlan (Welles), with a prime suspect being Sanchez, a young Mexican secretly married to the victim’s daughter.

Typical in the film noir genre, events are not what they seem like as layers of the plot slowly unravel. The heavyset and disheveled Captain nostalgically visits a brothel run by Tanya (Marlene Dietrich), who barely recognizes him because he’s gained so much weight since their last meeting.

Vargas forsakes his bride to spearhead the investigation but soon locks horns with corpulent Quinlan, and the duo begins to feud. Could Quinlan or Vargas have something to do with the car bombing, or could other supporting characters be behind or involved in the shenanigans?

This is an excellent part of Touch of Evil, as the film leaves the viewer guessing.

Heston and Leigh are the lead couple, and their chemistry is apparent from the first scene in which they appear together. Sexy and mysterious, she hunkers down in a dump fraught with peril while he attempts to solve the crime and keep his girl safe.

Outside factors play a significant role in keeping the lovers apart. Although Heston’s portrayal of a Mexican man is quite the stretch, the audience will nestle comfortably into the events as they reveal deeper layers.

Once a handsome man, Wells is not afraid to let it all hang out as the fat and racist Quinlan becomes one of the greatest and most complicated screen villains as his true colors emerge.

As the film’s title boldly suggests, does his character contain complexities that make him evil and keep some sympathies, or does he wreak havoc on all he touches with his devious nature only the tip of the iceberg?

Viewers await the final act to have several questions answered as motivations are finally revealed.

Touch of Evil (1958) provided delicious and pulsating material for filmmakers clever enough to study its intricacies, notably Roman Polanski for Chinatown (1974).

Nuggets were also thrown the way of Alfred Hitchcock, who got the idea for Leigh to appear in Psycho (1960) two years later, catapulting her character alone in a hotel peril and mixing in a weird hotel clerk.

The power the film had to hatch other great films from its ingenuity is the most fun part of watching it repeatedly.

1964 Films, Agnes Moorehead, Bette Davis, Bruce Dern, Cecil Kellaway, George Kennedy, Joseph Cotten, Mary Astor, Olivia de Havilland, Robert Aldrich, Thriller, Victor Buono

Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte-1964

Leave a comment

Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte-1964

Director Robert Aldrich

Starring Bette Davis, Olivia de Havilland

Scott’s Review #632

Reviewed April 8, 2017

Grade: B+

The follow-up film, but not a direct sequel, to the surprise 1962 hit, What Ever Happened To Baby Jane? Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte (1964) is a psychological thriller directed by Robert Aldrich.

The film was intended to reunite Aldrich with stars Bette Davis and Joan Crawford. Crawford filmed several scenes, but the tension between the stars proved too much, and Crawford dropped out.

Olivia de Havilland took her place, and reportedly, the filmmakers scrambled to re-shoot the film nearly from scratch.

Shot in black and white, just like What Ever Happened To Baby Jane?, the film is very similar in style and tone, and, rather than Los Angeles as the setting, the setting is now the sprawling southern landscape of the deep south- Louisiana to be exact, a vast estate with a lavish mansion is the featured ominous setting.

The action begins in 1927 at a grand party at the well-to-do Hollis family mansion.

The night is fraught with tension, and secrets are harbored- most notably, southern belle Charlotte (Davis) and her married beau, John (Bruce Dern), plan to elope and steal away into the night together.

When John is threatened by Charlotte’s father, Sam (Victor Buono), he regrettably breaks up with Charlotte, destroying her. Later, John is decapitated and his hand severed, leaving all of the guests only to assume that Charlotte was murdered after she appears wearing a blood-soaked dress.

Due to a lack of evidence, Charlotte is set free.

The remainder of the film takes place during present times (1964) and in the same mansion, now slated to be demolished by the town in favor of a highway.

Charlotte is old and haggard, having lived a life of seclusion. Her father is long dead, and her only company is her dedicated and faithful housekeeper, Velma (Agnes Moorehead).

Frantic at the thought of leaving the safety of her estate, Charlotte asks her cousin Miriam (de Havilland) to visit. Events then become stranger and stranger as past secrets and jealousies are revealed.

Taking nothing away from the talents of Olivia de Havilland, I cannot help but imagine how much better Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte would have been if Joan Crawford had settled into the role of cousin Miriam.

The real-life rivalry between Crawford and Davis made What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? It is a compelling work, and the angry emotions are fresh and authentic.

Interestingly, the characters are reversed in this film—Davis plays the victimized Charlotte, while Crawford would have played the villainous Miriam, and the results would have been delicious.

The plot is decent, but nothing spectacular, and not nearly as splendid as What Ever Happened To Baby Jane? , although certain similarities abound between the two films: a giant mansion, black and white cinematography, a mentally unstable (or assumed to be) character, a character being either drugged or victimized, and two female characters who are related.

To compare the two films, which is impossible not to, What Ever Happened To Baby Jane? Wins in spades. It is the more compelling of the two films.

What sets Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte, well above mediocrity (with fewer actors, it may have been), is the casting of one of the greatest actresses to grace the big screen.

Bette Davis’s portrayal of the victimized Charlotte is fantastic. She encompasses vulnerability, anger, fear, and energy. Her facial expressions and those passionate eyes give so much to Charlotte.

The clever resolution to the film and the plot twist after the film is pretty well-written and surprising, given that the characters assumed to be involved in the murder are not as guilty as one might think, or at least not in the way one might think, and by the time the credits roll, the story has a satisfying, hopeful ending.

Another success of the film is its use of two gruesome scenes, which is surprising since the film predates the lifting of the film censorship rules.

When a severed head comes tumbling down the grand staircase of the mansion, it frightens and is not in the least campy or over-the-top. As John is hacked to death in the opening sequence, his hand is severed from his arm, and it dramatically tumbles to the floor.

The scenes resonate because they were rarely done in mainstream film as early as 1964.

Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte is a fantastic companion piece to the superior What Ever Happened To Baby Jane?

Watching back-to-back is a fantastic late-night viewing.

Successful to the film are top-notch talents such as de Havilland, Victor Buono, Bruce Dern, Agnes Moorehead, and the superior film queen, Bette Davis, which makes any film worth watching.

Oscar Nominations: Best Supporting Actress-Agnes Moorehead, Best Song-“Hush, Hush, Sweet Charlotte,” Best Music Score-Substantially Original, Best Art Direction, Black-and-White, Best Cinematography, Black-and-White, Best Costume Design, Black and White, Best Film Editing

1941 Films, Agnes Moorehead, Alan Ladd, Arthur O'Connell, Best Film of the Year, Dorothy Comingore, Drama, Herman J. Mankiewicz, Joseph Cotten, Mark Robson, Orson Welles, Ruth Warrick, Scott's Top 100 Films

Citizen Kane-1941

Leave a comment

Citizen Kane-1941

Director Orson Welles

Starring Orson Welles

Top 100 Films #19

Scott’s Review #296

60000605

Reviewed December 12, 2015

Grade: A

Regarded as one of the greatest films ever made, Citizen Kane (1941) is a technically brilliant film that introduces fantastic new elements into a film that has not been seen before and has not been replicated for decades. It is a timeless masterpiece that is still enjoyed and marveled at in modern times.

One can forget what the story is about, as one can sit back, not having any idea of what the story means (it can be a bit difficult to follow), and look at the film from a cinematic perspective.

The various camera angles, shadows, and use of an actual ceiling (never seen in film before) are impossible not to appreciate for any film lover.

My favorite scenes occur when director (and star) Orson Welles uses snow falling outside as the cameras look through a window to observe the winter wonderland. This quality is simply astonishing in creative technicality.

I can view this scene over and over again.

The plot is a hybrid of drama and mystery. It examines the life and legacy of newspaper legend Charles Foster Kane.

The character, played by Welles himself, is loosely based on a real-life figure, William Randolph Hearst.

The film is told mainly through narrated flashbacks, as a newsreel reporter attempts to solve the big mystery centered around the deceased celebrity- his dying word, uttered from his lavish Florida mansion, was “rosebud,” and nobody seems to know who “rosebud” is or what the word represents.

As the story progresses, we learn more about the famous Kane. The reporter Jerry Thompson learns that Kane’s childhood in Colorado was one of poverty.

His mother, discovering a gold mine on her property, sent Kane away to be educated by a famous banker, thus securing his future. Thompson also interviews Kane’s business manager and Kane’s ex-wife, who is now a drunk and owns a nightclub, but neither can shed light on the mystery.

The mystery- never solved by Thompson nor anyone else- is revealed at the end of the film, to the viewer only, in fantastic form, and Kane’s childhood is key to the entire puzzle. This angle is creative and imaginative and brilliant for the whole film.

Technically, one of the best, most creative film creations, Citizen Kane, has lost none of its marvels over the years and can be watched, studied, and introduced to new generations of film lovers eager to learn what a true movie gem is all about.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Outstanding Motion Picture, Best Director-Orson Welles, Best Actor-Orson Welles, Best Original Screenplay (won), Best Scoring of a Dramatic Picture, Best Sound Recording, Best Art Direction-Interior Decoration, Black-and-White, Best Cinematography, Black-and-White, Best Film Editing

1943 Films, Alfred Hitchcock, Best Film of the Year, Henry Travers, Hume Cronyn, Joseph Cotten, Macdonald Carey, Patricia Collinge, Scott's Top 100 Films, Teresa Wright, Thriller

Shadow of a Doubt-1943

Leave a comment

Shadow of a Doubt-1943

Director Alfred Hitchcock

Starring Joseph Cotten, Teresa Wright

Top 100 Films #40

Scott’s Review #117

60010878

Reviewed July 17, 2014

Grade: A

Shadow of a Doubt (1943) is a black-and-white Alfred Hitchcock film about a quaint California town with a killer. The town is idyllic and wonderful: People attend church on Sundays and meet at the drug store for ice cream sodas.

The film was shot on location in a small town in California rather than on a sound stage, adding much authenticity.

The Newton family is at the center of the thriller, led by Charlie (Teresa Wright), a young woman who idolizes her recently visiting Uncle, also named Charlie (Joseph Cotton). They are very close- almost like father and daughter.

When Uncle Charlie is suspected of being the notorious Merry Widow Murderer, Charlie is conflicted. Could her Uncle be the murderer?

Shadow of a Doubt is one of Hitchcock’s more straightforward films, and the town itself is a huge plus. It’s quiet and family-oriented- what could go wrong? But evil embodies the city, and events slowly start turning dark.

A scene in which the family sits down for a quiet meal that turns into a conversation about death is famous and influential. The train sequence is nicely shot. There is also a fantastic side plot involving two friends playing an innocent game of “How would I murder you?” unaware of the irony of the game itself.

The film is not as flashy or complex as other Hitchcock films, specifically Vertigo (1958), but that aspect works to its credit.

Hitchcock adored the idea of a small town with foreboding secrets, and this film is quite a gem.

Shadow of a Doubt (1943) is a good, old-fashioned thriller and a must-see for Hitchcock fans.