Sabrina

Some actors are actors, and others are movie stars. This movie features lead actors who were most emphatically movie stars. Longtime favorite Humphrey Bogart and more recent obsession Audrey Hepburn bring their legendary, luminous presences to this delightful story, which features a ton of charm and wit and just the right amount of romantic sentiment. William Holden—no slouch himself in the movie star department —provides terrific support here, while Billy Wilder brings his usual expertise to both the script and the director’s chair. Mostly though, this story shines because the two leads just bring something extra special to their roles. It’s the kind of thing that Hollywood used to deliver routinely—indeed that it was built upon—and it is ever so refreshing to turn back the clock and experience it once more. A movie that everyone can fall in love with—whether you live in the big house or over the garage. 

Casino Royale (1967)

Every spy movie has to have some sort of mystery in it. The mystery here: who the hell thought this was a good idea? I mean, it’s not like the legit Bond movies take themselves all that seriously, so how far can you really go in parodying them? The answer to that question is painfully evident here. Every so often this movie raises itself up and achieves a level of extraordinary stupidity; the rest of it is a mishmash of lame, incomprehensible, unwatchable, or some combination of all three. The only moment in the movie that is even within hailing distance of competence is the baccarat scene—and that’s the one part of the script that plays it straight! Otherwise, this is a bomb of staggering proportions, a film that is so bad it can’t even achieve "so bad it’s good." Seriously, I like a spoof as much as the next guy, but this...words fail. At least, as I struggle to find something good to say, I can at least report that a few of the women in the flick are great to look at. So there’s that. Otherwise, yeesh. Your mission: avoid this at all costs.

The Wild Bunch

I have to admit, I'm not quite sure what to make of this flick. It is revered as a deconstruction of Western movies, but I found little in its content that really cuts to the core of what the old oaters were about and how they needed to be taken down a peg. Unforgiven does a much better job of that. This outing seems more interested in changing times--it did get made in times that were a-changin', after all--as embodied by the oldsters who embody the altered societal landscape, all of which has some interesting notes but is hardly the foundation of an all-time classic. There's also weirdness in the occasional scenes of the gang members going off on extended laughing jags, which I guess are supposed to exemplify how 'wild' they are, but mostly just comes across as disjointed oddness. (Given the film's '60s provenance, those scenes also come across as everyone being high, which may have been purposeful, too.) In a lot of ways, the story arc of Robert Ryan's character, a former fellow traveler of the bunch, is more interesting than the story of anyone in particular who is still in the gang. Nevertheless, judged simply as a Western story, the movie mostly works, with good action in several memorable scenes, and most of the principal actors acquit themselves well. I just think, looked at soberly through the lens of time, this film is not really the sensation it was viewed to be when it first arrived.

Network

I suspect that this film has suffered with the passage of time. That's typical for old movies, but the wear and tear is more impactful with this flick. I'm sure it was great when it was a biting satire; since subsequent history has turned it into prophecy, the resulting reaction has to be one of sadness. The pseudo-romantic subplot doesn't work so well, but nevertheless, the characterization of the dangers of corporate media make this a primer that every informed citizen should see. Posted 3/7/05.