"THE TEN COMMANDMENTS" (1956) Photo Gallery

 

Below are images from the 1956 Cecil B. DeMille epic, "THE TEN COMMANDMENTS". The movie starred Charlton Heston, Yul Brenner, Anne Baxter and Yvonne DeCarlo:

"THE TEN COMMANDMENTS" (1956) Photo Gallery

"Forgiven Too Quickly"

 

"FORGIVEN TOO QUICKLY"

I just finished watching the Season One episode of "LEGENDS OF TOMORROW" called (1.09) "Left Behind". I have a major issue with this episode and it deals with the character of Sara Lance aka White Canary.

This problem had originated with the previous episode, (1.09) "Night of the Hawk". In that episode, the Legends team went to a small town in Oregon 1958 to investigate a series of murders tied to Season One's major antagonist, Vandal Savage. They discover that Savage was using an Nth metal meteorite - the same material that transformed Kendra Sanders aka Hawkgirl and Carter Hall aka Hawkman into meta humans, and Savage into an immortal - to create humanoid bird-like creatures. The team managed to create a serum to cure those victims of Savage's experiment. Unfortunately, before all of them could leave 1958; Mick Rory aka Heatwave had arrived to attack the ship. Mick, who had ended up in the clutches of the Time Masters, had been brainwashed into serving the latter group in order to hunt down the Legends' leader, Rip Hunter for attempting to use time travel to save his murdered family. Mick's attack forced most of the team to leave Dr. Ray Palmer aka the Atom, Kendra and Sara behind in 1958. They remained stranded in time for two years.



So what happened? During the years between 1958 and 1960, Ray and Kendra continued their pose as a college professor and his wife. And what did Sara Lance do? Instead of remaining in close proximity with Ray and Kendra, she had decided to return to the Himalayas and Nanda Parbat in order to resume her association with the League of Assassins and her role as an assassin. Sara did not suffer from amnesia or anything like that. When the Legends - along with Ray and Kendra - traveled to Nanda Parbat, they assumed that she needed to be rescue. But Sara was not suffering from amnesia. She immediately recognized the other Legends and turned them over to her leader, Ra's al Ghul, as trespassers to be executed. Rip invoked the trial-by-combat ritual to save the team and named Kendra as their champion. Sara was named as the League's champion. Just as Kendra was able to get to Sara, Mick arrived as Chronos and the team was forced to capture him with Ra's permission. He allowed them to leave, with Mick as their prisoner. Sara, on the other hand, did not become a prisoner. Dr. Martin Stein aka Firestorm had a ready-made excuse for her.

It occurred to me that the writers really went out of their to give Sara Lance an excuse for betraying the other Legends to the League of Assassins in "Left Behind". The transcript written by Beth Schwartz and Grainne Godfree claimed that those two years Sara had spent with the League - between 1958 and 1960 - had led her to lose sight of her identity and all of the character developed she had acquired with Team Arrow and later, during her early months with the Legends.

I say bullshit to that. Sara had clear memories of the Legends when they arrived at Nanda Parbat in 1960. Also, Dr. Stein's explanation only gave her an "excuse" for her decision to betray the team to Ra's al Ghul. Stein's words did not excuse or explain what happened back in 1958. No one bothered to question why Sara's first instinct after getting stranded in 1958 was to rejoin the League of Assassins. "Left Behind" revealed a montage of Ray and Kendra settling down in that Oregon town and her, getting bored in their apartment. You mean to say, Sara never considered going back to school? After all, she was roughly 19 or 20 years old when she and Oliver Queen were shipwrecked on Lian Yu following the sinking of the Queen's Gambit in "ARROW". Sara could have continued her college education. She certainly had the brains to continue this path. Instead, Sara took the easier path and resumed her role as an assassin for the League of Assassins - but only in a different period in time. And her second instinct was to betray the other Legends to the League, despite knowing who they were. Yet, the other Legends were very quick to forgive her for her actions, in compare to Mick Rory aka Chronos, thanks to Schwartz and Godfree's transcript.

The hypocrisy of this whole scenario still strikes me as truly amazing after four years. I am not saying that the Legends should have also quickly forgiven Mick. Nor am I saying that they should have never forgiven him or Sara. But the Legends should not have quickly forgiven Sara either. They should have confronted her about her decision to betray them to Ra's al Ghul. They should have been just as reluctant to forgive her as they were reluctant to forgive Mick. The handling of Sara Lance's character in "Left Behind" was one of the few cases of bad writing I have ever encountered on "LEGENDS OF TOMORROW".

"MANK" (2020) Review

 

"MANK" (2020) Review

When it comes to biopics about Hollywood history, I must admit that I have a slight addiction to them. I really enjoy reading about Hollywood history. And I especially enjoy reading about the industry's so-called "Golden Age". So, when I learned about the upcoming release of "MANK", a biopic about Hollywood screenwriter, Herman J. Mankiewicz, I was pretty eager to see it.

However . . . I never got the chance to watch "MANK" in movie theaters during the fall/winter of 2020-2021. "MANK" had the bad luck to be released while the entire world was in the grip of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although Netflix had released the film in theaters for a limited period in November 2020, the streaming service/production company eventually released it on its streaming service the following month. Because of this, a good number of months had passed before I had eventually watched it on television.

"MANK" began in 1940, when the then young wunderkind Orson Welles hired veteran screenwriter Herman J. Mankiewicz to write the screenplay for his new movie, "CITIZEN KANE". Unfortunately, Mankiewicz is in Victorville, CA; recovering from a broken leg he had sustained in a car crash. With the assistance of his secretary Rita Alexander, he becomes aware of the similarities between the movie's main character and newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst. This awareness not only inspired Mankiewicz to work on Welles' screenplay, but also led him to recall his history with Hearst, the latter's mistress, Marion Davies; and the smear campaign against Upton Sinclair's 1934 California gubernatorial campaign.

Since "MANK" is not a documentary, but a historical drama, I knew that its narrative would not be completely accurate. However, I do believe that screenwriter Jack Fincher and his brother, director David Fincher, took a lot of liberties in regard to historical accuracies. Perhaps too much. Yes, the movie featured historical accuracies that included Mankiewicz's car accident and broken leg, his employment with both Paramount Pictures and Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Upton Sinclair's bid for Governor of California in 1934 and of course, Mankiewicz's collaboration with Welles and John Houseman on "CITIZEN KANE".

However, the main problem with "MANK" is that Jack Fincher tried to connect the efforts to undermine Upton Sinclair's gubernatorial campaign with Mankiewicz's screenplay for "CITIZEN KANE". And it did not exactly work. It failed to work due to Mankiewicz's political beliefs. Considering that Sinclair had ran for governor as a Democrat, it seemed implausible that Mank would have been that upset over the state's business leaders - which included movie studio chief Louis B. Mayer, studio producer Irving Thalberg; and newspaper magnates like Hearst and Harry Chandler - going out of their way to undermine Sinclair's campaign. Mankiewicz's politics tend to skewer toward conservative, except when it came to fascism.

It seems quite obvious that Jack Fincher needed an explanation for why Mankiewicz had been willing to write "CITIZEN KANE", a scathing portrait of William Randolph Hearst. So he invented one. But you know what? I find myself wondering what topic had really caught the Finchers' attention - Mankiewicz's connection with Hearst, Davies and "CITIZEN KANE"; or the 1934 California gubernatorial election. Because honestly . . . it seemed as if both screenwriter and director were more interested in the latter. If that was the case, then the Fincher brothers should have solely focused the movie's topic on the election.

I have another quibble about "MANK". One I found some of the dialogue in the film's first half hour a bit too stylized for my tastes. In one early scene, it seemed as if the Finchers had tried too hard to recapture a West Coast version of the Algonquin Round Table. Also, why did the Finchers shot this film in black-and-white? What was the point? Because to me, this decision to film in black-and-white seemed like another attempt at a homage to Hollywood's Golden Age via a gimmick. And I am getting weary of gimmicks - especially unnecessary ones in Hollywood productions.

Otherwise, I did not have a problem with "MANK". There are at least three reasons why I ended up enjoying this film. One, the movie featured a first-rate character study of Herman J. Mankiewicz. I have read a good deal about him. Granted, the movie was not completely honest in the writer's characterization. The latter's political beliefs would have never led him to get upset, let alone outraged over the campaign against Upton Sinclair. However, David Fincher's screenplay did a very admirable job in capturing Mankiewicz's other traits - including his wit, his addictions and air of weariness. If I must be frank, I believe Gary Oldman's superb performance achieved this even more than the Finchers' screenplay and direction.

Two, although I found the creation of "CITIZEN KANE" rather interesting, it did not strike me as particularly unique. Well . . . I take that back. "MANK" did tell this story specifically from the screenwriter's point-of-view. The 1999 HBO film, "RKO 281", told this story mainly from Orson Welles' point-of-view. However, the movie's depiction of Hollywood's connection to California's 1934 gubernatorial election struck me as the film's more interesting and original aspect. This was especially apparent in scenes that featured a montage of the phony newsreels criticizing Sinclair and the election's final night.

One aspect of "MANK" really impressed me - namely the performances featured in the film. They either ranged from competent performances from the likes of Tom Pelphrey as Joseph Mankiewicz, Charles Dance as William Randolph Hearst, Ferdinand Kingsley as Irving Thalberg, Joseph Cross as Charles Lederer, Toby Leonard Moore as David Selznick, Sam Troughton as John Houseman, Bill Nye as Upton Sinclair and Arliss Howard as Louis B. Mayer. Mind you, I believe there were times when Howard's performance threatened to become a bit too theatrical. But I still enjoyed it. I was very impressed by the performances from Tuppence Middleton as Sara Mankiewicz, Tom Burke as Orson Welles and Amanda Seyfried as Marion Davies. As much as Seyfriend's performance impressed me, I do not believe she had deserved an Oscar or any other acting nomination for her performance. I do not believe her performance was that exceptional.

There were a handful of performances that I really enjoyed. I thought Jamie McShane gave a very emotional performance as test director Shelly Metcalf, who shot the anti-Sinclair newsreels. Frankly, Lily Collins' performance as Mankiewicz's no-nonsense secretary Rita Alexander impressed me a lot more than Seyfriend's performance. And I thought she and the leading man had managed to create a superb screen chemistry. Although I believed that Seyfriend's acting nominations were undeserved, I cannot say the same for Gary Oldman's performance as Herman J. Mankiewicz. I thought he was superb as the screenwriting icon agonizing over his earlier apathy toward the governor's election, while struggling over his alcoholism and creation of the "CITIZEN KANE" screenplay. He truly deserved his acting nominations - especially in one scene in which the main character went into a drunken rant against the Hollywood machine and Hearst.

"MANK" was definitely not the best movie of 2020. Perhaps it was one of the better ones. I still believe it could have been a better film if David and Jack Fincher had not attempted to connect the creation of "CITIZEN KANE" with California's 1934 governor election. But its re-creation of the latter proved to be one of the film's highlights. And the movie also benefited from excellent direction from David Fincher and excellent performances from a cast led by the always superb Gary Oldman. Honestly, I would have no qualms about buying a DVD copy of this film.

"WITHOUT REMORSE" (2021) Photo Gallery

 

Below are images from "WITHOUT REMORSE", Amazon Prime's 2021 adaptation of Tom Clancy's 1993 novel. Directed by Stefano Sollima, the movie stars Michael B. Jordan:



"WITHOUT REMORSE" (2021) Photo Gallery

Melton Mowbray Pork Pie

 

Below is an article about the British dish known as the Melton Mowbray Pork Pie:



MELTON MOWBRAY PORK PIE

Meat pies have been a staple of world cuisine for centuries. At least as far back as the medieval era. The use of pork has been more associated with the British Isles than any other country . . . as far as I know. But one of Great Britain's most famous pork pies happens to be the Melton Mowbray Pork Pie.

A pork pie is a traditional English meat pie that is usually served either at different temperatures, depending on the individual pie. It consists of a filling of minced pork and pork fat that is surrounded by a layer of jellied pork stock in a hot water crust pastry.The dish is usually eaten as a snack or with a salad. The question remains . . . how does the Melton Mowbray Pork Pie differ from other British pork pies?

While preparing a traditional pork pie, the cook uses a mixture of fat and cured meat, giving the filling a pink color. For the Melton Mowbray Pork Pie, only uncured pork is used, leaving a gray color for the filling when prepared. The pork is usually chopped in slightly larger pieces, instead of minced. Also, the pie's crust is hand formed and baked free-standing. This allows the sides to bow outwards, rather than being vertical as with mould-baked pies. Unlike other British meat pies, the Melton Mowbray Pork Pie is served cold.

The exact date for the Melton Mowbray Pork Pie's origin is unknown. However, the dish had originated in Melton Mowbray, a town in Leicestershire. Some claimed that the pie was popular among fox hunters in that area during the late eighteenth century. However, others have pointed out that the association of the pork pie trade with Melton had originated around 1831 as a sideline in Edward Adcock's bakery and confectioners shop. A number of other bakers then started supplying them within a decade, including former grocer Enoch Evans, who may have been responsible for establishing the industry on a large scale. Eating Melton Mowbray Pork Pies for Christmas has developed into a tradition in the East Midlands. Although its origin is unknown, the association of Melton Mowbray Pork Pies with Christmas might date back to the mid-19th century. This proved to be the busiest time of year for the Melton manufacturers.

Here is a recipe for the Melton Mowbray Pork Pie from the BBC Food website:


Melton Mowbray Pork Pie

Ingredients

Pastry
150g/7oz lard
50ml/2fl oz milk
50ml/2fl oz water
450g/1lb plain flour, plus extra for dusting
salt and freshly ground black pepper
1 free-range egg, beaten, for brushing

Pork Jelly
900g/2lb pork bones
2 pig's trotters
2 large carrots, chopped
1 onion, peeled, chopped
2 sticks celery, chopped
1 bouquet garni (bay, thyme, parsley; tied together with string)
½ tbsp black peppercorns

Pie Filling
400g/14oz shoulder of pork, finely chopped
55g/2oz pork belly, skin removed, minced
55g/2oz lean bacon, finely chopped
½ tsp ground allspice
½ tsp freshly grated nutmeg
salt and freshly ground black pepper


Preparation

*For the pastry, place the lard, milk and water into a small pan and gently heat until the lard has melted.

*Sift the flour into a large bowl and season with salt and freshly ground black pepper and mix well.

*Make a well in the flour and pour in the warm lard mixture. Mix well to combine, until the mixture comes together to form a dough. Knead for a few minutes, then form into a ball and set aside.

*For the pork jelly, place all of the pork jelly ingredients into a large pan and pour in enough water to just cover. Bring slowly to the boil, then reduce the heat to a simmer. Cook for three hours over a low heat, skimming off any scum that rises to the surface, then strain the stock through a fine sieve and discard the solids.

*Pour the sieved stock into a clean pan and simmer over a medium heat until the liquid has reduced to approximately 500ml/1 pint.

*For the pie filling, place all of the pie filling ingredients into a large bowl and mix well with your hands. Season with salt and freshly ground black pepper.

*Preheat the oven to 180C/350F/Gas 4.

*Line a pork pie dolly (or a jam jar) with cling film to prevent the pastry from sticking.

*Pinch off a quarter of the pastry and set aside. On a floured work surface, roll out the remaining three-quarters of pastry into a round disc about 3cm/1¼in thick. Place the pie dolly into the middle of the pastry circle and draw the edges of the pastry up around the sides of the dolly to create the pie casing. Carefully remove the dolly from the pastry once your pie casing is formed.

*Roll the pork pie filling into a ball and carefully place into the bottom of the pastry case.

*Roll out the remaining piece of pastry into a circle large enough to cover the pastry case as a lid.

*Brush the top inner parts of the pastry casing with some of the beaten egg and place the pastry circle on top. Pinch the edges of the pastry to seal the pie. Brush the top of the pie with the rest of the beaten egg, then bake in the oven for 45 minutes to one hour, or until the pie is golden-brown all over.

*Remove the pie from the oven and set aside to cool. Cut two small holes in the top of the pork pie and pour in the pork jelly mixture (you may need to heat it through gently to loosen the mixture for pouring). Chill in the fridge until the jelly is set.

*To serve, cut the pie into slices and serve with piccalilli or chutney.

"MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS" (1974) Review

 

"MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS" (1974) Review

Whenever the topic of Agatha Christie novels pop up, many critics and fans seem to rate her 1934 novel, "Murder on the Orient Express" as among her best work. This stellar opinion seemed to have extended to the 1974 movie adaptation. After all, the film did receive six Academy Award nominations and won one. Is "MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS" the best adaptation of an Agatha Christie novel? Perhaps. Perhaps not. Is it my favorite? Hmmm . . . I will get to that later.

But I cannot deny that the movie, also produced by John Bradbourne and directed by Sidney Lumet, is a first-class production. One could easily see that Bradbourne and Paramount Pictures had invested a great deal of money into the production. They hired the very talented and award winning director, Sidney Lumet; along with an all-star cast led by Albert Finney; cinematographer Geoffrey Unsworth; production and costume designer Tony Walton; and Paul Dehn to write the screenplay.

One of the most unique aspects of this particular movie is that it started with a haunting montage featuring newspaper clippings and newsreel footage of a tragic kidnapping of a three year-old girl from a wealthy Anglo-American family named Daisy Armstrong. The kidnapping of young Daisy would end up playing a major role in the true identities of the murder victim and the suspects. The movie soon moved to Istanbul, five years later, where famed Belgian-born detective, Hercule Poirot (Albert Finney), is about to journey back to England via the Orient Express. Despite the unusually heaving booking in the train’s Calais coach, Poirot manages to secure a berth aboard the train thanks to an old friend, Signor Bianchi (Martin Balsam), who happens to be a director for the Orient Express’ owner – the Compagnie Internationale des Wagons-Lits. After the train departs Istanbul, a mysterious American art collector named Ratchett (Richard Widmark) informs Poirot that someone has been sending him threatening notes and asks for the Belgian’s protection. Due to Poirot’s instinctual dislike of Rachett, the detective refuses to help. And after the train finds itself snowbound in the Balkans, Rachett is stabbed to death in the middle of the night. Signor Bianchi asks Poirot to unearth the murderer.

”MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS” turned out to be the first screen adaptation of a Christie novel to feature an all-star cast. One that only included screen stars such as Lauren Bacall, Sean Connery, Ingrid Bergman, Anthony Perkins, Vanessa Redgrave, Jacqueline Bisset, Michael York and Jean-Pierre Cassel. The cast also included stage luminaries such as John Gielgud (who was a bigger star on the stage), Wendy Hiller, Denis Quilley and Colin Blakely. And all of them gave solid performances, although I do have a few quibbles about a few members of the cast.

Critics had been especially impressed by Finney’s interpretation of the Belgian detective and Ingrid Bergman’s role as a shy and nervous Swedish missionary. Both received Academy Award nominations and Bergman won. Personally, I am not certain if both actors deserved their nominations. They gave pretty solid performances. But I found nothing extraordinary about Bergman’s Swedish missionary. It was a first-rate performance, but not worthy of an Oscar nomination, let alone an Oscar. And although he gave a superb performance, there were times when Finney seemed to drift into some kind of parody of the Continental European. This is why I believe that actors with strong European backgrounds like Peter Ustinov and David Suchet should portray Poirot. But . . . I cannot deny that he gave a very good performance. And he also conveyed certain aspects of Poirot's personality that I have never seen in Ustinov or Suchet's portryals - one of them being a talent for manipulating others into revealing themselves during an interrogation. I also enjoyed his brief scene with Jeremy Lloyd, who portrayed an obsequious British Army officer that served as Poirot's escort during the crossing of the Bosphorus Strait.

And there were times when some members of the rest of the cast seemed to be in danger of drifting into hammy acting. Sean Connery sometimes came off as heavy-handed in his British Army officer routine. And Anthony Perkins’ parody of his famous Norman Bates role irritated me to no end . . . especially since the literary version of his character – Hector McQueen – came off as a completely different personality. However, Perkins had one really excellent scene that featured no dialogue on his part. But three performances did strongly impress me – namely Jean-Pierre Cassel as the rail car attendant, Pierre Michel; Rachel Roberts as a German lady’s maid named Hildegarde Schmidt; and Colin Blakely as Cyrus Hardman, an American detective masquerading as a talent scout. Unlike some members of the cast, these three managed to give subtle, yet convincing performances without sometimes careening into parody. And Blakely provided one of the most poignant moments in the film when Poirot revealed his character’s (Hardman) personal connection to the Daisy Armstrong kidnapping case.

As for the movie’s screenplay, I must admit that Paul Dehn and an uncredited Anthony Shaffer did an excellent job in adapting Christie’s novel for the screen. They managed to stay true to the novel’s original plot with very few changes. Their only misstep was in making the Hector MacQueen’s character into a parody of the Norman Bates role from ”PSYCHO” (1960), due to Perkins being cast into the role. Or perhaps the fault lay with Lumet. Who knows? However, I cannot but express admiration over the brilliant move to include the montage that featured Daisy Armstrong’s kidnapping and murder at the beginning of the film. It gave the story an extra poignancy to an already semi-tragic tale. Despite these changes, Dehn and Shaffer basically remained faithful to the novel. They even maintained the original solution to the mystery. Granted, the solution made ”MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS” one of the most unusual murder mysteries in the history of Hollywood, let alone the literary world. And although the revelation of the murderer(s) came off as somewhat inconceivable, it made the movie memorable . . . aside from the flashback that revealed Rachett being murdered. That seemed to last longer than necessary. I also have a different opinion regarding the fate of the murderer(s). When I had been younger, it never bothered me. Now . . . it makes me slightly uneasy. If you have read the novel or seen the movie, you will know what I am talking about.

Richard Rodney Bennett had received a great deal of praise and an Oscar nomination for his score. I thought it meshed beautifully with the scenes featuring the Orient Express’ departure from Istanbul . . . and its continuing journey at the end of the film. However, there were times when I found it a bit over-dramatic and slightly out of place for a murder mystery. I really admired Tony Walton’s production designs for the movie. I thought it truly invoked the glamour and magic of traveling aboard the Orient Express in the 1930s. And it also conveyed the claustrophobic conditions of traveling by train, beautifully. Surprisingly, he also designed the movie’s costumes. I can only assume he was trying to adhere to Sidney Lumet’s desire to recapture the old Hollywood glamour from the 1930s. Unfortunately, I felt that Walton’s costumes for most of the characters seemed a bit over-the-top. But I must admit that I admired his costumes for Jacqueline Bisset, Ingrid Bergman and Vanessa Redgrave’s characters.

In the end, one has to give Sidney Lumet high marks for putting all of this together to create a classy adaptation of an unusual novel. Granted, I have a few qualms with some of the performances, characterizations and the plot’s resolution. And there were times in the middle of the movie when Lumet’s pacing threatened to drag the film. In the end, Lumet’s direction managed to maintain my interest in the story. And ”MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS” remains a favorite movie of mine after 48 years.