macheath-ny

I'll be surprised if this gets read very often, coming as far down the line as it does. Enough others have praised this film, and given sufficient summaries of its gossamer plot, that I am gratefully relieved of the duty.

My only comment is that, if you are interested at all in cinema choreography, you watch at least through the "Portland Fancy" number. You don't have to sit through to "Get Happy"; watch whichever "That's Entertainment" anthology that features it. But if you ever want to understand what drives movie dancing, and why Kelly and Garland are equated by many with Astaire and Rogers, "Portland Fancy" should provide your education. a traditional square/contradance that segues into a jitterbug session and then to a challenge tap between the two stars, it is in this viewer's opinion one of the finest dance moments in any movie. To enjoy dance but ignore this moment does the soul a disservice.

As is now better known to the general public, this episode was hatched by McGoohan after he was told that the series was to be canceled. Originally, the preceding "Once Upon a Time" was to be the final episode of the first season. McKern was to die, The Prisoner was on his way to see Number 1, and the audience would have to wait the summer to find out what happens.

McGoohan, whose political and social viewpoint was by then clear to everyone who had watched the series from its inception, was as should be expected miffed by its termination, and decided to give audience and producers alike a run for their money. The surrealism of this episode is never matched again until the finale of 'Twin Peaks'(qv). I give it a 9 rather than a 10 because the preceding episode is im(ns)ho one of the greatest pieces of television drama ever written, and therefore should not ever have another piece from the same series given equal appraisal.

I remember when the series first played in the US. We had just gone through the "Battle of Chicago" and were about to begin the slow slide into mediocrity with the election of Richard Nixon. We were a year after the "summer of love" and a year before "Woodstock Nation". Drugs were still a new phenomenon in the American middle class, and enough of us believed that there was still hope to galvanize a huge portion of the population. And then, in the middle of it all, came the face of a smiling No. 2....

The Prisoner is truly an archetypal series. It so accurately reflects its time in both its excellences and its deficiencies. There's no question that the majority of the episodes play better to a cannabinolized audience; and I won't argue with someone seeing the series in the 21st century for the first time who complains that there are so many plot holes and bad acting in so many of the episodes that they can't understand why anyone would consider this worthwhile.

But then, there's "Once upon a Time".

This is more than an episode. It's more than a TV show. It is high drama and classic stagecraft. When seen without commercials, it has the impact of a Beckett or Pinter one-act. It is unquestionably McGoohan's magnum opus. I expect that someday, perhaps in the not too distant future, someone will get the idea of putting it onstage, along with "The Dumb Waiter" or "Play", so that the author will get the recognition he deserves as a playwright. But in the meantime, if you have any affection for "theatre of the absurd" or "comedy of menace", you should make this episode a must see. And if you've started the series but have lost your enthusiasm after an episode or two, skip right to this. Once you understand the premise, you don't need all of the prior 15 episodes to fully immerse yourself in what cannot be denied is an exemplar of 20th century dramaturgy.

A few notes of full disclosure here: 1) I love musical theatre 2) I'm old enough to remember this show when it was on Broadway.

OK, now: This isn't really a movie. It's a film of a stage show. With the exception of a couple location shots of New York City 40 years ago, it's almost exactly the Bob Fosse staged production that swept the Tony Awards in 1962 and is one of only seven musicals in 90 years to win the prestigious Pulitzer Prize for Drama. Robert Morse, Rudy Vallee, Ruth Kobart and Sammy Smith reprise their stage roles as the ambitious corporate ladder climber, the pompous executive, his dictatorial secretary and the middle manager who "plays it the company way". Michelle Lee is Morse's love interest, and Maureen Arthur channels Judy Holiday as Vallee's ditzy paramour. The musical numbers are transferred almost verbatim from stage to screen, and if you're not familiar with the show, you won't be disappointed that a few of them were left out.

In sum, you have to be ready to accept this as more a stage play than a cinematic experience; but if you are in the mood for a true period piece that truly reflects the American musical theatre of the past century and is unlikely to be replicated or even approximated on the screen in the foreseeable future, you could do a lot worse than watching this on a commercial free channel or grabbing the DVD for an afternoon with your teens, especially if any of them have thoughts of a career on the stage.

Definitely not.

Bellamy and Shatner were in one vignette among a dozen, entitled "Light one Candle" and involving a conversation between two Roman tax collectors in Bethlehem on the day of Jesus' birth.

My knowledge of this comes from my role in another of the vignettes entitled "Miracle of the Orphanage" which featured Jessica Tandy, Margaret Hamilton, Bernadette Peters and Richard Thomas. Other vignettes featured those listed in the cast list.

Since the database requires 10 lines I'll try to keep my extraneous comments to a minimum

I guess I'm not surprised at the demographic breakdown and the high rating this film has garnered; All through it, I found myself impressed by the acting and the dialogue. As Elvis Mitchell said in his NY Times review, this is Jake Gyllenthal's promise of star quality. But, having said that, I can't give the film as a whole the high marks that the masses have. Maybe it's because I've been where Donnie is portrayed to have been, maybe it's because when I think of great films, I look to the storyline as much as to the individual scenes. Maybe I just don't get it, but the mobius strip quality of the story just takes one step beyond my understanding of space/time continuum theory. There is this aura of "Edward Scissorhands" mixed with "Blue Velvet" and the atmospherics are absolutely hypnotizing, but that's the equivalent of a subliminal track repeating "you'll love this movie". When you come right down to it, the ending is unresolved and unresolvable. Is it a Christ allegory? Does Donnie go back in time to sacrifice himself so that Gretchen will live? OK. I can accept that. But by doing that, he allows Cunningham to escape punishment. There is no satisfactory resolution presented by the writer/director, as much as we might wish it to be so because we like the movie so much. It's certainly no "Chinatown" or "Treasure of Sierra Madre" and while enjoyable and watchable more than once as visual art, does not imnsho rise to the level of literature.

I first saw this show when it was broadcast live in the 1950's with Alfred Drake and Patricia Morrison, the two leads from the original Broadway cast. I won't be too old fogeyish, but I find the new version, as typified by Rachel York's modernization of inflection in "So In Love" to be a bit overmuch. Admittedly, I'm of the old school, but the bluesy tone just doesn't go with the melody for me. If you want to know what I'm getting at, get ahold of the Drake/Morrison original cast recording. It's too bad that new directors feel they have to imprint their egos not only on the acting and dialog, but the arrangements as well. They might do better to consider Porter the equivalent of Verdi or Puccini, and at least leave the music the way he composed and directed it.

OK, it's not Godfather, but hell, I LIKED Godfather III so what can I tell you? Anyway, there is no better black comedy b-movie gangster flick ever made. From the sterling cast to the Hitchcockian twists (the harvester combine scene is a killer) this is a movie that never stops surprising and pleasing. And while some may chafe at its pace, the fact is that there is an absolutely consistent rhythm that carries from first to last. It's a homage to the great gangster films of the 30's and 40's, as well as a textbook on the production of a perfect small film. Everything about it makes sense, and everyone in it is excellent. This is a fable, so don't be put off by the ending. Think about it. It works.