056. Papillon

056. (08 Feb) Papillon (1973, Franklin J. Schaffner) 48



An entertaining adventure, but Papillon is hardly a film for the ages. From his shoddy ability to show the passage of time to a couple wretched dream sequences, Schaffner makes questionable choices that keep his film from feeling accomplished. Above all, the runtime's insanely bloated. I'm sure the film could go without any number of things like a montage of Steve McQueen cavorting with an island girl.

The fact that this is regarded as McQueen's best performance suggests what an oxymoron that is. He and Dustin Hoffman are believable buddies, but neither is strong here. Lovely, varied photographed and Jerry Goldsmith's score are the strongest assets. I'm frankly surprised Goldsmith managed an Oscar nomination, even though his score is magical, since it's not in use for the vast majority of the film.

The Sting (1973) ***

Other than my husband, Mr. Clooney, there never was a sexier man than Paul Newman. As such, I would enjoy watching The Sting (1973) even if the story wasn’t extremely clever and the music memorable.  Thankfully, Oscar-winning director George Roy Hill’s Best Picture winner is all of those things and so much more. Nominated for ten Academy Awards (it won seven), The Sting is loaded with great performances and is a stylish production.

The Oscar winning screenplay by David S. Ward was inspired by real life grifters Charley and Fred Gondorff.  In the film, Newman plays Henry Gondorff, an accomplished confidence man who knows how to stack the deck like no other person.  He becomes paired up with a hot-headed hustler named Johnny Hooker (an Oscar nominated Robert Redford) when a mutual friend (Robert Earl Jones) is rubbed out by no-nonsense crime boss Doyle Lonnegan (Robert Shaw).  To “sting” the mobster out of $500,000 the pair constructs an elaborate con game based on something called “the wire”. They enlist dozens of known con artists in and around Chicago to reign down their own special brand of revenge on Lonnegan.  Along the way they must also evade a crooked cop (Charles Durning) and a cold-blooded assassin (Dimitra Arliss), and they must also try to do the one thing that no con worth their salt wants to do: they must trust one another to finish the big score.

It goes without saying that the story keeps you guessing. Will there be a double-cross? Who’s telling the truth?  How can Newman still look that hot at 48?  Ward’s script is smart and well-constructed.  I didn’t notice any fat that could have been trimmed; and, all of the elements of the plot folded together very nicely right up to the end.  I’m a fan of smart scripts, and this is definitely one of the smartest of the 1970s.

Strangely, what most people remember about the movie is its score. Marvin Hamlisch’s Oscar-winning adaptation of Scott Joplin’s rag is memorable.  For days after watching this I had the tune bouncing around in my head.  Both Joplin and ragtime saw a resurgence in popularity during the 1970s because of Hamlisch’s inspired (quite literally) soundtrack.

This was the second time Newman, Redford, and Hill worked together (they’d done Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid in 1969) and it showed.  There’s a familiarity to the two leads interactions onscreen that builds an instant camaraderie between their characters. Newman plays the elder splendidly, and Redford looks like he’s really taking mental notes from a master.  Personally (and perhaps selfishly), I wish Newman’s Gondorff was featured more in the film, but I can’t really complain about how much time is spent on Redford’s Hooker.  Still, a few more shots of those Newman eyes would have been nice…

Of course, no film can be good without a gifted supporting cast.  I adore Eileen Brennan, so of course I loved her Billie here.  While she may have not gotten as much screen time or dialogue as I would have liked, who can play a tough broad like Brennan?  And, of course, no one played an SOB like Robert Shaw, either.  It is reported that no one wanted to play Lonnegan and that Newman hand-delivered the script to him in London. The limp he incorporated into this role was a real one, as he had an accident one week prior to filming that injured his knee. 

Finally, kudos must be sent out to Edith Head’s Oscar-winning costume design and James Payne and Henry Bumstead’s Oscar-winning art direction.  The story takes place in 1936 and it looks like it.  The clothes, hairstyles, and mise en scène are all spot on.  Heck, they even used title cards to educate the audience on the various parts of a sting. 

Overall, I enjoyed The Sting. It’s a highly entertaining film that is filled with good performances and smart writing.  Plus, Newman just looks so damn sexy!

Cult-TV Blogging: The Starlost: "The Goddess Calabra" (October 6, 1973)

The third episode of The Starlost (1973) is titled “The Goddess Calabra,” and it arrives replete with a story credit from famed sci-fi writer Ursula Le Guin. 

Don’t let that factoid get your hopes up, however.  

Despite the presence of cult-television favorites Barry Morse and John Colicos in prominent roles, this story is mostly straight from the genre convention playbook.   Our heroes arrive in a corrupt, post-apocalyptic culture -- one populated only by men -- and must escape when the leader wants Rachel as his bride.  But to save Rachel and achieve his freedom, Devon (Keir Dullea) must battle The Governor (Colicos) in a fight to the death.

Yep, you’ve pretty much seen it all before…

“The Goddess Calabra” features two central points, and one comes across rather powerfully, while the other comes across as half-baked.

Let’s get the bad news out-of-the-way first.  

This episode involves the biosphere of Omicron, an enclosed world where, after years of devastating war, only men exist.  Since the XX chromosome has been lost to history, the men of Omicron mix their sperm with artificial eggs inside tiny, computerized machines.  “We bred out the weak, the soft, and the intellectuals,” the Governor reports to Rachel (Gay Rowan).  Only the “best and strongest” remain.

Love in this all-male culture is considered “unnatural,” the Governor also reveals, but the episode doesn’t go any further than that declaration, and that’s the problem.

In the total absence of women, one must wonder, what about sex?  Do the men of Omicron have sex with each other, or is that also deemed “unnatural?”  

The problem is that you can’t introduce a one-sex, human culture, and then avoid entirely the issue of sex drive, and how it is…satisfied.  This oversight might have been addressed simply by having the Governor accompanied at all times by a male partner.  Nothing overt since this was the 1970s just somethingto indicate that -- even in the far future -- human beings remain human beings.

Because “The Goddess Calabra” doesn’t explain at all many crucial aspects of this all-male culture, the scenes between the Governor and Rachel don’t really work as intended.  He seems to really fall in love with Rachel, but we must ask if this is a believable or likely development.  In a society with no women, where the “ideal” is male strength and power, would a citizen of that culture find a woman attractive in the slightest?  Wouldn’t he be conditioned socially not to find her so?

Again, it’s all just terribly half-baked, a high-concept post-apocalyptic culture that for not even a second passes the smell-test of realism. It’s a silly idea when rendered in such a neutered fashion.

Worse, in culture of all men -- where strength is prized -- Colicos is not even slightly believable as a governor who maintains his rule through daily combat and challenges.  He’s got a sizable gut, for one thing.  But in general, Colicos lacks the physique of a man who fights back enemies on a regular basis.  The scenes with the actor battling more physically-fit men (including Devon), just don’t ring true, and are terribly choreographed.  The story notes that the Governor is getting old, and worries about the day he will be defeated, but still it’s plain that the man is not in fighting shape right now. 

I appreciated much more in “The Goddess Calabra” the other sub-plot, the one involving Shaliff (Barry Morse), a monk who has dedicated his life to preserving the sacred scrolls in his monastery. 

These scrolls are actually technical schematics of the Ark, but I love the quasi-historical reference.  Shaliff and his dedicated flock are like the Irish monks who preserved Western history in the Dark Ages by laboriously transcribing and copying works of art.  Those works would have been lost for all time if not for their dedication.  I rather like the idea of this period in Earth Ship Ark’s history as a kind of “Dark Ages,” with the Omicron Monks preserving the blueprints and tech-sheets for future generations.  It’s a good touch in an otherwise dopey episode.  The preserved blueprints also serve a role in the series's story arc.  They reveal that in the "nethermost" dome, there is a back-up bridge, one that may still be functional.

The best scenes in “The Goddess Calabra” are those in which Shaliff (Morse), representing religion, and The Governor (Colicos) representing the State, battle for dominance, and discuss their long-standing friendship and competition.  It’s a pleasure to watch these two accomplished cult-tv actors interact, and some of the writing in these scenes is more nuanced than is usual.

As Starlost’s first visit to another biosphere culture, “The Goddess Calabra” is mostly a disappointment. 

Next week: “The Pisces.”

Cult-TV Blogging: The Starlost: "Lazarus from the Mist"

In some ways, “Lazarus from the Mist” -- the second episode of the 1970s Canadian science fiction series The Starlost -- plays like the second part of the pilot, “Voyage of Discovery.” 

Here, our naïve protagonists Devon (Keir Dullea), Rachel (Gay Rowan) and Garth (Robin Ward) learn that the key to changing the Earthship Ark’s (collision) course may rest in forgotten documents and archives preserved throughout the ship’s domes, thus necessitating a dome-by-dome exploration of the vast generation ship.  That dome-tod0ome exploration consists of the remaining fourteen episodes or so of the series.

In “Lazarus from the Mist,” Devon and his friends are still standing on the Ark’s ruined bridge when they detect an automated distress call apparently emanating from a command/medical section nearby.  They attempted to find that section, but are promptly waylaid by primitive “Tube People,” service-personnel of the ark who, over the centuries, have developed a kind of nomadic society in the corridors.  They have never seen sky, nor soil.  They have never seen night or day.

While Garth holds the Tube People at bay, Devon and Rachel locate the medical section and a vast cryonic vault.  There, preserved in stasis, are dozens of engineers and designers who may be able to set the Ark’s collision course right. Devon and Rachel awake one man, Dr. Gerald Aaron (Frank Converse) only to learn that he is dying from a “radiation virus” and doesn’t possess the knowledge they need to alter course.  Instead, he explains to the duo about the documents, blueprints and schematics located throughout the domes.

Later Garth, Devon and Rachel use the medical bay’s advanced equipment to save the Tube People’s leader from a bloody wound, and peace is forged.  The Tube People are led to an agricultural dome, where they begin a new life…

I must admit, I have watched this episode of The Starlost twice, and the first time I did so I found it virtually interminable.  It’s slow-moving, and there's no real sense of danger or conflict.  Much of the shooting-style remains unbearably claustrophobic.

On the second viewing, with expectations in hand, I began to register some of the episode’s more intriguing and interesting points.  Among these, I count Rachel and Devon’s moral debate about waking up the engineer, Aaron.  Rachel believes that such matters “should be left up to the creator” and worries that “we’re tampering with something we have no right to.” 

By contrast, Devon argues that everyone on the Ark is going to die if they don’t get the information they seek, so therefore the risk to one man is justified.  I tend to agree with Devon.

He makes a tough call in this episode, and shows some of the same spine he revealed in “Voyage of Discovery.”  Speifically, Devon wakes up a man suffering from a (nebulous “radiation virus” with the direct knowledge that he is, in essence, sentencing him to death.  And yet Devon makes a very human decision.  Wouldn’t any one of us accept a death sentence if we understood that it would save the entirety of the human race?

I suppose my biggest problem with the episode involves the “tube people,” subplot.  I love the idea of generational space travelers essentially going native over the long centuries, an idea well-dramatized in Space: 1999’s “Mission of the Darians” and also Pandorum(2009).  But the actors playing the Tube People are encouraged here, for some reason, to act like mental case, or very young children. I don’t think this concept really works very well.

After all, the Tube People have had a hard life scavenging for food, in a world of no daylight and no darkness.  They would be harder and tougher, I think, than the episode portrays them…and not so silly.  At the end, when the Tube People happily wave goodbye to Rachel, Devon and Garth, the moment is wince-inducing.  In another scene, they are depicted tossing around a ball to one another like pre-schoolers.

I also am ambivalent about the happy solution to the Tube People dilemma.  The awakened engineer, Araon, reports of a conveniently-located “agricultural” dome very nearby, where they can settle and begin life anew.  This works as a one-time solution, but if Starlost is to have any veneer of realism, it can’t just hand out vacant domes to every society Devon encounters.  Hopefully the resolution won’t recur.

But for every questionable moment or plot solution like that one, “Lazarus from the Mist” also provides a good moment or two.  Here, there’s a strong, emotional moment wherein Aaron watches listens to a video recording from his wife…made over five hundred years ago.  It’s a very human, very moving moment, and suggestive of The Starlost’s approach to character.  Devon, Rachel and Garth aren’t technical wizards and they don’t know a whole lot about theirown world (the Ark), but they do possess the capacity to remind the people they encounter and meet of their humanity.  I think that idea comes through loud and clear in this second episode.

I also like some of the weird sets in this episode.  The Cryonic Vault, for instance, looks pretty convincing, given the low, low budget of the series.  I doubt it’s a set that will get any use again, but it is nicely utilitarian and therefore convincing.  It compares not unfavorably to the “Ark in Space” set from vintage Doctor Who, in 1975.

Next week: “The Goddess Calabra.”

Cult-TV Blogging: Circle of Fear: "The Ghost of Potter's Field" (March 23, 1973)

In some ways, this week’s episode of the 1973 anthology Circle of Fear, “The Ghost of Potter’s Field,” plays like a remake of the extraordinary Ghost Story episode “Alter Ego,” by Dorothy Fontana.  

In that installment, as you may recall, a young boy was faced with a devilish doppelganger, one who wanted to steal his very life from him.  As the boy grew weaker, his malevolent opposite grew stronger and stronger…

“The Ghost of Potter’s Field” re-establishes the doppelganger concept, and the dynamic wherein only one individual can hold onto his life, with the counterpart facing oblivion.  Here, an investigative journalist named Bob Herrick, played by Tab Hunter, goes to visit a grave yard in Potter’s Field.  He believes the little-known cemetery might make a good story, because buried there are several men and women whose identity was not known at the time of death.   

On his first visit, Herrick is surprised to see what looks like an exact double watching him from afar.  Before long, this sinister counterpart insinuates himself into the journalist’s life, attempting to kill his friends and ruin his professional reputation.

The journalist and his girlfriend, Nisa King (Louise Sorel), realize that to destroy the doppelganger, they must learn his identity in real life.  They soon learn the doppelganger was once a gangster, and a man murdered by another gangster.  When they finally confront the spirit at Potter’s Field, they urge it to go after that murderer, not the journalist.  It seems to do so.

The concept of a writer battling an evil alter-ego is one that later found life in the 1990s, in Stephen King’s novel The Dark Half.  Here, the story is competently told, but all the horror elements do feel lifted from “Alter Ego.”  That story -- one of Ghost Story’s undisputed best -- succeeded so admirably because it featured a battle between the devil doppelganger and a kindly old teacher (Helen Hayes).  

That episode really put the audience in her court, as the evil child kept tormenting her.  “The Ghost of Potter’s Field” doesn’t find any story hook or character nearly as interesting. Tab Hunter isn’t especially expressive, but Louise Sorel shines as his more-knowledgeable and helpful girlfriend.

Next week, we reach the last Ghost Story/Circle of Fear episode, a masterpiece called “The Phantom of Herald Square.”

243. The Great American Cowboy

243. (08 Oct) The Great American Cowboy (1973, Kieth Merrill) 31



Sensationalism mars this documentary on rodeo cowboys. The cattlemen themselves are substantially more interesting than continuous montages and slow-motion shots of bulls nearly goring people. Kieth Merrill seems downright disinterested in getting to know these wranglers, which makes this disingenuously titled, repetitive and tedious.

210. Trapped

210. (18 Sep) Trapped (1973, Frank De Felitta) 44



Closing up a department store without checking the restrooms to see if there's an unconscious James Brolin in one of the stalls? That sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen. With attack dogs attempting to get at him, there's initially some menacing quality here. He outwits the dogs one by one, but it's hard to believe he never thinks to pick up a phone and call for help. (There wouldn't be a movie if he did, but there's not even a scene where they suggest the phones are dead?) Ultimately, this just drags on too long without ever creating a real sense of terror. Even though she's integral to the resolution, the B-story following his ex-wife feels pointless.

Double Feature: A Touch of Class (1973) & The Goodbye Girl (1977)

A Touch of Class:

This lighthearted film features Glenda Jackson in an Oscar-winning performance as a fashion designer who gets involved with a married man (George Segal). Having met in London, he invites her to vacation with him in Spain, which she agrees to for the physical aspects of their relationship. However, his producer friend is meeting his wife and kids in Spain, causing all sorts of problems with their plan for a secret getaway. After getting back to London, the pair continue to see each other, even renting a flat to use for their rendezvouses. All of the hustle and bustle of their affair takes it toll on them, and they must decide whether to keep seeing each other, or go their separate ways.

The film received nominations for Best Picture, Best Actress, Best Original Screenplay, Best Original Score, and Best Original Song. Glenda Jackson's win for Best Actress was her second Oscar win (after one for 1970's Women in Love).

The Goodbye Girl:

Written by playwright Neil Simon, this romantic comedy stars Richard Dreyfuss in his own Oscar-winning performance as Elliot, an actor who's just moved to New York City. His new apartment, it turns out, was sublet by his friend, who ran out on Paula (Marsha Mason) and her daughter Lucy (Quinn Cummings). Under the circumstances, Elliot agrees to let them live there, even though he is the rightful owner of the place. He's charming and funny, but has his share of quirks. While he practices for the role of Richard III, Paula tries to get back into dancing and Lucy takes a liking to Elliot. She even tries to sway her mother into liking him, which Paula can't help but do. But Paula's heart has been broken, and she has to find out if Elliot is like the others, or if he will stay with her and Lucy.

The film received nominations for Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Actress, Best Supporting Actress (Cummings), and Best Original Screenplay. This was actually one of two Best Picture nominees directed by Herbert Ross that year, the other being The Turning Point.

The Sting

The Sting, 1973
Directed by George Roy Hill
Nominated for 10 Oscars, Won 7
Up Against: American Graffiti, Cries & Whispers, the Exorcist, A Touch of Class

The Sting is a story about con artists in the 1930's Depression. Johnny Hooker and his partners Luther and Joe con $11,000 off a man on the streets, not thinking they'd get that rich. Luther announces his retirement and suggests and tells Hooker about a friend he has, Henry Gondorff, saying he should go meet him and learn "the big con". However, things don't go according to plan. The man they conned money off was a numbers racket courier for a famous crime boss named Lonnegan. When a corrupt police officer confronts Hooker and demands part of the pay cut (Hooker had already spent it all), pays in counterfeit bills. Meanwhile, Lonnegan's men murder Luther and Hooker must now flee, and heads to Chicago to meet Gondorff. While Gondorff was a once-great, he's now in hiding and is a bit nervous to take on Lonnegan. But he comes around and the two set up the "big con" for Lonnegan.

The film was an immediate success. It gained positive critic reviews, and was a box office smash. It was also the second pairing of George Roy Hill directed Robert Redford and Paul Newman since Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. It was released Christmas Day in 1973, and went on to win a lot of Academy Awards that year, including Picture, Director, Screenplay.

I really enjoyed this film. This is the first Robert Redford film I've seen, and also my first Paul Newman one (what a treat they both were!) and both were so great. They were great at the double acting (con men, pretending to be several different people, all innocent) and were real trouble-makers. But my favourite part of the entire film was the score. Compiled of mostly Scott Joplin's music composed in the early 1900's, and though not historically accurate for the time period (ragtime was no longer popular in the 30's), but was really really great. It fit the time so well, and was just so fun. It gave the film a bit of a lighter feel when darker music could've made the film more dramatic and sullen. It gave the film a spark quality, and really lit it up.

Additionally, the twists and turns the movie took were great. It really was a thinking movie, and it's so sad how little films like this are made any more. It was well thought out, entertaining, and had a few laughs that balanced the film out well.

Overall, the film was really good. It was a great showcase for Paul Newman and Robert Redford (who looks so much like Brad Pitt. Anyone else notice that?). It was a clever, kind of fun Best Picture as opposed to a lot of the more dramatic, serious, depressing ones.

Acting- 7.5/10
Directing- 8/10
Screenplay- 8/10
Music - 9.5/10
"The look"- 7.5/10
Entertaining- 7.5/10
Emotional Connection- 8/10
Rewatchability- 7/10
Did I like It?- 7.5/10
"Total Package"**- 7.5/10 


Total: 78

010. The Asphyx

010. (07 Jan) The Asphyx (1973, Peter Newbrook) 62



This overlong, but richly imagined period horror film may still be too staunchly British to work as much of a genre film. The asphyx itself is not even mildly spooky, just sort of odd and shrill. It is at least something special as an exceptionally strange costume drama, but there's little here that doesn't feel like a very stuffy stage play about immortality. The cinematography is flat and while the visual effects are fun, they're unremarkable. The explosive ending rules.

The Exorcist (1973) **

(This article is from guest contributor Sarkoffagus and first appeared at http://classic-film-tv.blogspot.com/.  The rating in the title is my own.)

Chris MacNeil (Ellen Burstyn) is an actress filming in Georgetown, Washington, D.C. She begins to notice changes in her 12-year-old daughter, Regan (Linda Blair): aggression, apparent seizures, speaking obscenities and profanities, etc. Chris takes Regan to various doctors and psychiatrists, but the girl’s behavior only worsens. When the medical professionals cannot adequately explain some of Regan’s more bizarre actions (one doctor suggests that muscle spasms were causing an entire bed to shake), Chris turns to Father Damien Karras (Jason Miller), a priest and psychiatric counselor. Father Karras, who has recently begun to question his own faith, eventually requests the Church’s permission to perform an exorcism. Finding a priest with experience in exorcism, the Church sends Father Merrin (Max von Sydow).

The Exorcist (1973) is based on the novel by William Peter Blatty, who also wrote the screenplay adaptation. The author had wanted William Friedkin to direct. Friedkin had recently won an Academy Award for Best Director for The French Connection (1971), and Blatty had hoped that the filmmaker’s gritty, documentary style would add realism to The Exorcist. Friedkin’s approach to the material is straightforward, a deliberately but effectively slow build to a menacing evil. On occasion, the film indeed feels like a documentary, as viewers watch Chris gradually learn what is happening to her daughter.

Blatty was not pleased with the version initially released in theaters, due to scenes that were cut from the film. Though the director has stated that he cut sequences at the bequest of the studio, the novelist felt that these scenes -- including a staircase conversation between the priests during the exorcism, with Karras questioning why Regan was chosen -- were essential to the plot. According to Friedkin, the excised scenes resulted in the two men not speaking to each other for years. Following the 25th anniversary DVD release, Friedkin returned to the source material and edited the cut scenes back into the film. Another sequence that had been removed was what has become known as the “spider walk” scene, where a contorted Regan does a reverse crawl down the stairs. Friedkin was unhappy with the effect, which was later digitally corrected (i.e., the visible cable could be erased).

There is the belief by some that The Exorcist was a cursed film. There were rumors of accidents on the set, sometimes resulting in injuries. Members of the crew or people related to them died during filming, such as Jack MacGowran, who played Chris’ director and possible love interest. Friedkin allegedly asked Father Thomas Bermingham (a technical advisor who also had a role in the film) to exorcise the set. When the film was released, viewers claimed to be possessed or experiencing extreme psychological reactions, some referencing the purported “subliminal” flashing of a demon’s face (although it’s not genuinely subliminal, since it’s clearly visible). Some audience members would prematurely exit the theater during a viewing or would become physically ill. Blatty, however, attributes this not to scenes of demonic possession but rather the sequences of Regan undergoing strenuous tests such as a pneumoencephalography (enduring a needle in her neck and having her head taped down, among other things).

The Exorcist was such an overwhelming success that it sparked a horror subgenre of possessed people and the resulting scenes of exorcism. Not surprisingly, clones and sequels invariably followed. Some of the more interesting takes on The Exorcist were: Alberto De Martino’s L’anticristo (1975/aka The Antichrist; The Tempter), Exorcismo (1975/aka Exorcism), starring popular and prolific Spanish horror star Paul Naschy (sometimes called the “Spanish Lon Chaney”), Un urlo nelle tenebre (1975/aka Cries and Shadows; The Possessor; and even the blatant Naked Exorcism, The Return of the Exorcist, and The Exorcist 3); and La endemoniada (1975/aka Demon Witch Child; The Possessed), directed by Amando de Ossorio, better known for his Blind Dead series. A Turkish film, Seytan (1974), is clearly an unofficial remake. Similarly, William Girdler’s Blaxploitation feature, Abby (1974), starring William Marshall (perhaps best known as Blacula), was sued by Warner Bros. for copyright violation. Mario Bava’s film Lisa and the Devil (aka Lisa e il diavolo), released before The Exorcist in 1972, was reedited with new footage added and retitled The House of Exorcism for its 1975 U.S. release.

John Boorman helmed Exorcist II: The Heretic in 1977. It follows Father Lamont (Richard Burton) investigating a death resulting from the exorcism of Regan. Blair reprises her role, and von Sydow appears as Father Merrin in flashbacks. The film performed poorly at the box office. Blatty fared a little better with The Exorcist III (1990), based on his novel, Legion, which was also the movie’s original title. The author wrote and directed the film, but the studio compromised his efforts, demanding rewrites, reshoots, and a title change. It featured George C. Scott as Lt. Kinderman and Ed Flanders as Father Dyer, both characters having appeared in the first film (Lee J. Cobb, who played Kinderman in The Exorcist, died in 1976). Jason Miller also makes an appearance as Patient X (with the insinuation that he is Father Karras, a studio alteration). Reportedly, the footage that Blatty originally shot has since been lost, which has been blamed on Morgan Creek Productions. The same year as The Exorcist III, the Exorcist parody Repossessed, starring Blair and go-to funnyman Leslie Nielsen, was released.

In 2003, Paul Schrader was fired as director of an Exorcist prequel (he had replaced John Frankenheimer, who had died in 2002 before filming had started). Schrader’s work was completely revamped by director Renny Harlin, and the movie was released in 2004 as Exorcist: The Beginning. After a poor reception of Harlin’s movie, Schrader was given additional funds to finish his nearly completed film. The movie, title Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist, received limited theatrical showings and subsequent video/DVD release in 2005. Although the film likewise was not well received, it’s generally preferred by fans of the series. Blatty publicly supported Schrader’s film, while expressing discontent for the 2004 version.

In 1980, Blatty wrote and directed The Ninth Configuration, an adaptation of his 1978 novel of the same name, itself a reworking of his own 1966 book Twinkle, Twinkle, “Killer” Kane (also an alternate title for the film). The author reputedly considered it a sequel to The Exorcist. A notable connection between the two films is Capt. Capshaw (Scott Wilson, who was nominated for a Golden Globe), an astronaut with a fear of dying in outer space, and it was supposedly Capshaw to whom Regan is referring when she speaks her famous line: “You’re going to die up there.” In addition to Wilson, the film was nominated for a Golden Globe for Best Drama and Blatty won for adapted screenplay. Several cast members, including Wilson, Miller, Flanders, and Nicol Williamson, would also star in Blatty’s The Exorcist III. The Ninth Configuration was not a success at the time of its theatrical release but has since gone on to achieve cult status.

Friedkin has boasted that he originally edited The Exorcist at the New York office building located at 666 5th Avenue. Radio and film actress Mercedes McCambridge provided Regan’s raspy voice during the young girl’s possession but did not initially receive a promised screen credit. She (and the Screen Actors Guild) were able to get her name added to the credits. The film’s original trailer, consisting of black and white flashes of a demonic face and a possessed Regan coupled with ear-piercing music, was supposedly banned by executives as it was deemed too frightening to play in theaters.

The film was nominated for 10 Academy Awards, winning for sound and adapted screenplay. It won a Golden Globe for Best Picture, with Golden Globes awarded to Friedkin, Blair and Blatty.

Recently, Warner Bros. released The Exorcist on Blu-ray, presented in a “book” format with details of the film and trivia. The two-disc set includes the original theatrical version and the director’s cut (released in 2000 as “The Version You’ve Never Seen”), as well as previously available and brand new features.

The Final Conclusion - Best Actress 1973

1973

5. Barbra Streisand in The Way We Were

This is a bit disappointing performance by a great talent. It is surely loved by many, but I just did not like it as much since it's quite a mixed bag: the beginning is fantastic, but the ending is rather mediocre and a bit boring. Too bad, because this could have been a fantastic performance.

4. Joanne Woodward in Summer Wishes, Winter Dreams

This is an occasionally great, but mostly underwhelming performance, which could have had an effect on me, but it's such a mixed overall achievement, that I was never truly impressed. Although there weren't any WOW! scenes, but I still liked this performance.

3. Marsha Mason in Cinderella Liberty

I can say about this very mysterious and hard-to-find performance, that I actually enjoyed it despite the fact that it's a bit failed effort or at least with me. I was never really touched by it, but I enjoyed it to a certain degree. I don't really see the brilliance in it, but I liked it.

2. Ellen Burstyn in The Exorcist

I can say that one of my favorite actresses gives my favorite performance of hers in a movie that's an old favorite. This is truly an amazing achievement by Ms. Burstyn, who's really at the top of her game. Excellent, extremely effective acting.

1. Glenda Jackson in A Touch of Class

This is not a typical Oscar-winning performance, but I'm really glad that it was honored, because it's an unforgettable, complex and extremely lovely work by a great actress. I'm sorry that there are not many people who appreciate it. I simply love it. Period.

So I can proudly announce

that my winner is...

Glenda Jackson

in

A Touch of Class

What a surprise! :-)

Final thoughts: Great year, not the best one ever, but I really enjoyed it after all. The overall standard of the movies covered a wide range from almost intolerably boring (Cinderella Liberty) to a cinematical masterpiece (The Exorcist). The performances were all at least good, I even enjoyed Woodward's acting, and that's something. I wouldn't say that the ranking was very difficult, though I was uncertain about #1 for a moment. But Glenda was a clear cut winner after all. I'm still shocked that there are many people hating this win. :(

Omissions:

• Tatum O'Neal in Paper Moon *My Pick*
• Julie Christie in Don't Look Now

The ranking of the already reviewed years:

1. 1969
2. 1974
3. 1989
4. 1959
5. 1939
6. 2009
7. 1963
8. 1966
9. 1973
10. 1990
11. 1978
12. 1954
13. 1948
14. 2002
15. 1940
16. 1998

The next year is one that I wanted to do ever since I started these reviews. I know right now that it's going to be difficult to choose between two of the ladies. But the clues:

• Mommie dearest
• Being 30 at 13, being 13 at 30 (help: Who said something like this?)
• Heal me!

What do you think? Any thoughts, observations?

Note: With this, Ellen becomes the most reviewed actress so far along with Meryl. But I don't mind, she's really a big favorite of mine. And yet I have never given her a win, though I'm thinking about giving her the win for Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore. That Final Conclusion was rushed and I wanted to make her my pick even then but unfortunately I clicked Publish accidentally and there was already a comment. Gee. And I don't want to take Gena's win either. That's gonna be tough, but I guess I have to re-watch both movies before deciding.

Barbra Streisand in The Way We Were

Barbra Streisand received her second (and to date last) Best Actress nomination for playing Katie, a leftist girl falling in love with Robert Redford in Sydney Pollack's romantic movie, The Way We Were. I think Barbra had a fair chance of winning. She was a great star, a previous Oscar winner, she was loved by people and she starred in a box office hit, a real audience favorite. I think she was third in the voting quite probably.

The Way We Were is a quite boring romantic movie. It's quite corny and predictable, but it's quite entertaining occasionally. I perfectly understand the reason for its success though: two charming superstars star in a romantic movie about two likeable people who have a doomed love affair, plus Barbra had to sing in it. The Oscar-winning song is quite good, though I definitely would have given it to Live and Let Die, which is one of my favorite songs. I don't get the Best Music win either: there's no music I noticed except for the song. Robert Redford gives quite a standard and bored performance and it's so obvious that he didn't like this movie.

I happen to like Barbra Streisand. I'm not a fan, but I always enjoy her movies. I loved her in Funny Girl and What's Up, Doc?, it might be a shame to admit, but I also loved her as Roz Focker in Meet the Fockers and Little Fockers. She's a superbly talented performer, an exceptional singer and a great actress. She has a great sense of humor, that really gets me every time. Therefore, I was really hoping that I would like her in The Way We Were. And I really did.

Although I liked her performance, I don't think that it's perfect at all. Much like Joanne Woodward (but to a lesser degree), her performance pales as the film goes on. It starts out extremely strong actually, that I even thought that this performance would be a perfect five in the end. However, somewhere in the middle (when they go to Hollywood) it becomes weak and quite weightless. The whole thing is rather mixed bag as a result: it has fantastic moments, but also scenes of mediocrity.

The character herself is a cliché: the Jewish young girl from New York with leftist political views, who ends up falling in love with a gentile boy. It might be possible though that the character became a cliché because of this movie, but it's still a cliché. Babs gets the best out of it though: she excellently delivers the sarcastic one-liners, and she has a kind of lovely presence, which had a very good effect on me. As I said, this first half is excellently handled by Barbra, she shows all the feelings of this girl quite well and you just cannot take your eyes off her.

Barbra shows perfectly well how Katie falls for this guy, despite the fact that they really do not seem to be a match made in heaven. Barbra carefully built this characters, step by step, but quite firmly. She showed that Katie is an extremely stubborn woman, who just doesn't want to give up on her views and beliefs. She never makes excuses for what she does and we feel that it's alright.

At this point, I still loved her performance. However, when she goes to Hollywood, all th positive things about her performance disappear. She just forgets to develop Katie, she's right there, but she doesn't have any depth or something that you can care about. She even loses her magnetic presence and everything becomes quite boring and slow. And you can observe that with the movie (which Barbra alone makes): it starts out strong and interesting and becomes slow and boring in the end, without any wit. Babs' performance always totally fits the movie, though she's always better than the material that she was given, to tell the truth. And this really made me disappointed: I so wanted to like her more and more and yet something was really missing.

I forgive her, though, because she handles the last scene very well: it's a very corny scene, but somehow, she1s so believable and loveable in it, plus the strength of the first half was really visible there.

This is a bit disappointing performance by a great talent. It is surely loved by many, but I just did not like it as much since it's quite a mixed bag: the beginning is fantastic, but the ending is rather mediocre and a bit boring. Too bad, because I know that this could have been a fantastic performance. I cannot overlook the incredible strength of the beginning, though.

Almost a four, but that would have been too much.

Glenda Jackson in A Touch of Class

Actress/politician Glenda Jackson received her third Best Actress nomination and second Oscar for playing Vicki Allessio, a divorced woman who's having an affair with a married man in Melvin Frank's Best Picture nominated movie, A Touch of Class. Glenda's second Oscar is one of the biggest upsets in Oscar history. She was the one who was not expected to win at all and the other actresses must have been (were :D) really pissed off. Furthermore, this became one of the least popular Oscar wins, though nowadays it's gaining more and more fans.

A Touch of Class is quite simply a great, very entertaining movie and I think that it deserved the Best Picture nomination. It's not one for the ages, but it's still better than The Sting, LOL. I thuroughly enjoyed it and there wasn't a boring minute. The screenplay is top-class, though my vote for that year definitely goes to Cries and Whispers. George Segal gives a charismatic lead performance, though his role is not as memorable as Glenda's. The Globe nom was deserved for him, though.

I hate hypocrisy more than anything. People always complain that comedy performances are never recognised at the Oscars, but when there is one lucky one, than it's instantly criticised, hated and so on. They are so eager to find all the flaws and mistakes only to prove that the Academy cannot get it right. Why can't someone appreciate a great lightweight performance as much as a serious one. Comedy is just as hard as drama. I will go further: giving an effective comedy performance is harder. You don't get to benefit from the drama and the sadness, it's all about you and if you miss an opportunity, you fail. That's it.

Glenda Jackson is a great actress. I'm not saying that I'm a fan (haven't seen enough from her), but I have seen all of her nominated works and was impressed by all of them. Her talent and style of acting is so unique. She has a great voice of which I just cannot get enough. She's gorgeous, talented and yeah, I think sexy (I guess I think that Mickey Mouse is sexy, I wonder how many people understood this). She always plays emancipated, free women (usually divorced) who are not ashamed of her own sexual needs. There's Gudrun from Women in Love, Alex Greville from Sunday, Bloody Sunday etc. And there's Vicki Allessio. I don't think that Glenda made many comedies, but this exception is really memorable.

This is quite a lightweight performance by its nature, but its effect is so far from lightweight. Whenever she's on the screen, she has this sizzling, charming presence which makes you listen to her, watch her and never take your eyes off her. Not for a moment. But you really don't want to, to tell the truth. Every line reading, every face of Glenda is just pure delight. Even in her very first scene. She's so coldly and politely sarcastic with Steve. She's cheeky, courageous and strong on the outside. She is far from being demanding, but she gets what she wants. She has a kind of "cut the bullshit" attitude, which makes her so attractive and likeable. But to have this effect she needs to deliver all the lines perfectly and as I said, she's just brilliant at that. None of the jokes falls flat, and the one-liners really hit. Especially in the scene where she has a hilarious argument with Steve at the hotel.

I have never thought about this one before (and many others I think), but Glenda must have put so much effort into this performance. She does it with such ease, but it's really complex acting by Glenda. She adds so many layers to Vicki. On the outside, she's a very sarcastic, strong woman, but inside, she's actually very vulnerable. Vicki wants a man in her life, she wants real happiness, but everything is working against her. In the beginning she just wants carefree sex, but in the end the whole thing becomes quite complicated. Glenda terrificly showed this vulnerable side of Vicki and the whole performance became quite bitter by this. I don't mind it that Glenda put a touch of drama into this movie. I think it really needed it.

This is not a typical Oscar-winning performance, but I'm really glad that it was honored, because it's an unforgettable, complex and extremely lovely work by a great actress. I'm sorry that there are not many people who appreciate it. I simply love it. Period. Terrific job, which naturally gets

What do you think? It's time for your last predictions! :)

Joanne Woodward in Summer Wishes, Winter Dreams

Joanne Woodward received her third Best Actress nomination for playing Rita Walden, an extremely depressed houswife in the hard-to-find movie, Summer Wishes, Winter Dreams. Somewhere I read that Joanne and Barbra were the front-runners to win the Oscar that year, though I myself think that Ellen Burstyn had a great chance of winning, too. I think that despite Joanne's success with the critics, she was probably only fourth or fifth in the voting. Her movie was not a huge hit, she was a previous winner etc.

Summer Wishes, Winter Dreams is a very strange movie: it's neither good nor bad as I said it's very strange. I could never understood the whole point of it (I guess it was an Oscar nomination for Woodward and Sidney), because it was changing the subject so fast and there wasn't enough time to make the impact last. So it's a failed effort partly, but the acting achievements are quite good, especially the one given by Martin Balsam. Not only did he deserve to be nominated, but he also would have deserved to win, in my opinion. I don't undestand Sylvia Sidney's nomination (OK, I get that it's a career nom) since she doesn't do anything except being bitchy for 5 minutes and have a heart attack. Though some people almost orgasm over her acting in this one. I really don't get it.

And there's Joanne Woodward, who's an actress that I just cannot stand. She's (almost) always too mannered, teary and quite annoying, or if she isn't (Mr. & Mrs. Bridge), she doesn't do anything interesting. Therefore, I did not have many expectations from her. Furthermore, I saw this movie a year ago or so and her achievement wasn't surprising. Clearly, this is a role written with an Oscar nomination in mind and I always felt that Woodward was also aware of that. She tries to be as showy as possible in order to make the audience like the performance. Strangely, she succeeds.

I don't like her in usual and that's why I was so surprised to be captivated by the beginning of her performance. It was so impressive and really grabbed my attention despite the fact that I was sleepy. I forgot everything and I only concentrated on Woodward's performance. I felt that she really understood the problems of Rita: she has nothing to do, she's bored, depressed, scared and fed up with her lifestyle. She just needs some changes in her life and has to come to terms with her son's homosexuality. Rita's also full of regrets and she just lives in her past: she cannot let it go, she still wants to be a little girl listening to the stories of her grandmother. Her reaction to her mother's death is so excellently played by Joanne: she's shocked doesn't understand a thing. She's just astonishing in these early scenes.

However, there comes the London part, after which her performance loses its strength and becomes almost as uninteresting as Mrs. Bridge. Her breakdown scene in the underground is just terrific, however. There are so many emotions right there and she really made it a very memorable moment that you cannot easily forget. Her suffering faces, her tears are both annoying and devastating. I don't if it was the right thing, but I liked it, because there was something that made this character very human. Although Rita is very unlikeable, I still cared about her and felt sorry for her.

After this scene, Martin Balsam takes over the movie and he's so terrific that he almost completely overshadows Woodward. I had to force myself to concentrate on Woodward as Balsam really stole the spotlight from her. His character was so interesting and so full of real pain and compared to him, Rita is so dull. And she doesn't get any other great scenes, either. She's not bad as she's able to keep up her strong presence, but she's just not the same anymore. It all becomes quite slow and a bit boring. The dramatic intensity of her performance is really uneven and in my opinion it's always much more fortunate if you're not that strong in the beginning, but you make a lasting impression in the end. In Woodward's case it's the other way around and the viewer is always (mostly) effected by the ending. In the very last scene, Woodward is quite good, even moving, but that crucial lasting effect was just missing and therefore the whole performance became quite lacking. That's too bad.

So after all, I saw an occasionally great, but mostly underwhelming performance, which could have had an effect on me, but it's such a mixed overall achievement, that I was never truly impressed. Although there weren't any WOW! scenes, but I still liked this performance of an actress that I dislike. Good job.

Again I wasn't certain about the rating. I was thinking about 3.5 and even 4.5, but I think that this is fine after all.

What do you think? Any predictions, thoughts?

P.S.: As you can see, I will finish 1973 in 2010, but that's no problem, I think.