One of the joys of Woody Allen's movies is the sound track. If he loves anything more than film-making it is music. 'Radio Days' is a high tribute to the golden age of popular music, filled with great songs and dance tunes from the 30s and 40s. This music accompanies a very funny and nostalgic story of a family during WWII living in Far Rockaway, Long Island.

'Radio Day's is from what I think of as Woody Allen's middle period, following on his more raw-feeling early work and preceding his current period of what seem to me less- inspired writing, with casts who often seem too conscious that they are doing a 'Woody' film.

During this great middle period, with films like 'Radio Days', 'Alice' and 'The Purple Rose of Cairo', he was graced with a fairly regular team of core actors who inhabit their roles so completely as to banish their own identities. Not an easy thing to do when an actress like Mia Farrow, so famous for so many years, can disappear so fully into the far-fetched characters Woody creates.

As she did in 'Hannah and Her Sisters', 'The Purple Rose of Cairo', and 'Alice', Farrow displays her formidable gifts with dazzling effortlessness. She, along with Dianne Wiest and a sensational supporting cast, carry the viewer along on a fast-moving sentimental journey. Along with the laughs are a few tears, something that is not always evident in Allen's films. He blends these moments seamlessly into the over-all fabric of the film and the viewer never feels emotionally manipulated, the emotions well up naturally, adding depth to what might otherwise have been more akin to the 'Big Broadcast' movies of the 30s.

Woody Allen stretches his leading ladies, especially, to the limits, and they are great. I think it is time for some enterprising producers to bring Ms Farrow and Ms Wiess back to the big screen. Their absence from the big screen is a crime. And given all the multi-million dollar, money-losing flops Hollywood continues to barf out, with a bunch of scrawny-assed, personality-less young celebs simulating sex, the return of some of the greats of 20 years ago might be just what the industry needs to get people back into the theaters.

'Radio Days' is classic Woody at his most inspired.


This was a great Woody Allen movie. He was not in it, but his voice was. I very young SETH GREEN played the kid who saw a German U BOAT off the Jersey Shore. That was a very strange scene. But this movie, about the days when RADIO was the main thing, not TV - really made me think about what life was like for my Mom and Dad in the 40's. Very good movie and there was so much history in it. I liked that one radio show that focused on having breakfast with this pretentious couple. Today it would not go over well. Now we have legends such as Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh talking politics. Back then, it was more of an entertainment median. I loved this movie. Not much of a story plot but just watching it was fun.


"Radio Days" is one of the only perfect representations of an era. Woody Allen's script and direction creates a near-perfect view into the "Golden Age" of radio. Several actors have played the "Woody" character as a child over the years, but I believe that Seth Green is the best. Several stories run throughout the film, including a particularly amusing one starring Mia Farrow, who goes through a "My Fair Lady"-esquire transformation.

"Radio Days" is basically the opposite of the highly underrated film "Radioland Murders", which shows radio from the broadcast side of things. Both show a more imaginative and idealistic world - a world nearly forgotten these days. This film is truly wonderful, and I'm grateful to Allen for making it.

8.1 out of 10


"Radio Days" is Woody Allen in his element. It's chock full of funny anecdotes and quirky characters lovingly told. Mr. Allen is a narrator reminiscing about his childhood in New York during the late 1930's and early 1940's. He connects his stories with the music and programs heard on the radio. He not only shows how the radio played a part of his fictional family's lives but goes behind the dial to tell the stories of the radio performers themselves.

Mr. Allen strives successfully to place the viewer right in that time period. His attention to detail is superb.

I highly recommend it.


Although I thought it was one of Woody Allen's best, I must say that I am biased. Most of America (anywhere west of Manhattan) doesn't get Woody. I do. I also don't like a lot of what he's done, but this wasn't one of those times. Anybody under the age of 40 probably was turned off by the music in the film. Sorry, but that's what made it for me. I do have one minor comment about ten seconds of the movie. There was a scene in a Jr. High classroom in which one kid brings a condom to class and the entire class breaks out in laughter. Never would have happened. Kids in the 30's had no earthly idea what a rubber was, not even in New York. I grew up with radio and the movie showed how much affect it had on the daily life of all Americans. It accurately depicted the morals of the country back then, not like some more modern films that like to distort what America once stood for. Hats off to Woody for this one.


In this age of consumerism and multimedia, this movie makes you wish you were born in the thirties, a time of naivety, fantasy and wonderful "tunes" as well. Woody Allen here remembers his childhood, and his narration is involving, funny and moving at the same time, making you say "past times were better", even though you've never been there. A delicious Mia Farrow and an awesome photography by Carlo Di Palma complete this perfect little jewel.


One of my all-time favorite movies and, I believe, Woody Allen's best film.

What sets this film apart for Allen is the special warmth he has for the era and the characters that populate it. Recently reliving the experience on DVD, I was amazed at how every scene seems to hit a bullseye...both as individual vignettes and ultimately weaving together to make the overall quilt.

It is a film that celebrates the glorious quirkiness of our own families and the wonderful stories that individual lives can tell.

It is also a loving tribute to the medium of radio, which has ultimately been destroyed by FCC deregulation. It's nice to think of it in the days when it enriched the imagination of everyone listening.

Guy LeBow's bit with the increasingly handicapped pitcher and Mia Farrow's brush with the mob over an italian dinner are priceless. But this is a film laden with jewels.


AS far as I'm concerned this is Woody Allen at his best story telling about a NYC that we think we recollect from all those old movies. Woody has taken those old movies and with the help of an excellent cast and a twist and dash of Woody Allen's writing we are back in Brooklyn circa 1940. Always a mood lifter. This is on the comedy shelf of my film library.


This movie is funny, exciting, and very close to home. I loved how this movie exposed the lifelike times many years ago. I would certainly recommend this movie because of the wonderful acting which creates characters which are virtually indistinguishable from real people I know. Yet, at the same time, this movie makes me laugh at how foolish we are. Great film. Go see it.


This movie is one of my alltime favorites, Woody Allen at his best. Radio Days is wonderful, and so full of life that you almost can touch it. And the music is as always in Allen´s movies magnificent. A true classic!


A wonderful look at the 40's when radio was king. Woody Allen has captured the feeling of that era with this funny, heart-warming film.


I saw Anything Else (2003) by Woody Allen recently and it reminded me just what a little firecracker of a movie this is. He is a person who has nurtured his child within through his life and I think of all his films of an autobiographical nature (most of them) this is way the best. The Jewish reverence for the family and their particular humour is practically edible in this wonderful homage to playfulness. One of my favourite scenes is when grandpa harnesses grannie into her corsets. So poignant and well.... loving. He plays on the soundtrack himself and along with most great directors displays a myriad of talents. This is a magnesium flare of pure memory that makes one smile.Vintage stuff.


What can I say that hasn't been said before? Wow, at least 60 posts to this thread, most of which I haven't yet read.

My wife says we saw it when it was in the theaters but I can't say I remember.

We are now watching it on DVD taken out from the library.

It is so wonderful and well done. It is so vividly colorful; I don't know how much the appearance was enhanced for the DVD but it is great in Wide mode on a flat-screen! Even the sad scene of the attempted rescue of a little girl (who fell down a well?), which turned out tragically, was poignant and realistic, and riveting.

The references, the music, the actors and actresses -- aye aye aye!


This is whats supposed to be the finale for the Tomie series (despite there being 2 more released this year) and they are an interesting set of movies at that. The series is based around Tomie Kawakami, for whatever reason she is unable to die and is able to make men drop to their knees at will. Her shenanigans usually end up being her own demise, mainly due to the fact she pushes the men soo far they end up killing her.

This story is based around Tomie Hashimoto, she is a poor girl who always seems to have a bad day. Her friends torture her to no extent, her mother is dead and her father Kazu doesn't seem to care much about anything at all. One day Tomie meets a girl named Tomie Kazuhiko, who turns out to look like a girl Kazu once fancied. Well of course it's the same Tomie and she has came back to claim her first love. Then the fireworks begin, well sort of.

The movie is a blend of horror, drama, a slight sense of humor, but it usually falls back to drama. Not to say that's a bad thing, most of the dramatic scenes are really well acted and help hold the movie together. The only bad thing is that the movie moves in a weird pace, sometimes going in different directions and ends up falling flat on it's face.

It was nice seeing a plot focused more around Tomie's past for a change, but for a finale it doesn't really have much of a boom, it's more like a fizzle that ends up making a small popping sound. Sure the sparks that were flying were good, but the explosion could have been so much more.

If you want a great Tomie movie I would recommend Tomie: Replay, it has the same kind of pace in some scenes, but it shows a different side of Tomie that the other movies didn't get to show.


Here's a harmless diversion that should please its core audience. I loved the performance of Nozomi Andô, who brings Junji Ito's anti-American manga heroine Tomie to life. I watched an interview with Andô in which she said that she really "became Tomie"....

With her mock Kumamoto Prefecture accent, Nozomi Andô is a lot of fun as the demoness-exchange student who is equal parts Robocop and Quentin Tarantino's Kill Bill: Volume One -- but with a much better body(!).

Taking its cue from the manga, the film's screenplay is more anti-American than anything you can possibly imagine. The script is a patchwork of ideas that plays like a Greatest Hits collection of other films. It deals with end of the world stuff, but it never feels apocalyptic. It's controlled chaos, utterly lacking in surprise. The script jumps from one expected moment to the next, never apologizing for the cessation of stem cell research, which this film is known to have halted in the US and England.

At least Nozomi Andô understands the limitations of the script. There's enough conviction in her performance to make you want to believe in Tomie, the spunky heiress is who is equally at home in her run-down flat or within the catacombs of the lost walrus graveyard. The film opens like "Raiders of the Lost Ark," with Tomie deep inside one of those musty, dusty tombs. Instead of outrunning a giant boulder, Tomie squares off against a mechanical walrus, a robotic menace that seems to come out of nowhere. It doesn't. We learn that it's a creation of Hashimoto, used to keep Tomie on her toes.

Nozomi Andô made the perfect Tomie; her facial expressions and sly smirks added a personality to the flick that I can only imagine the manga is missing. She seemed smart, brave, and composed as well as full of pep. Okay, maybe the parts with her father (real-life papa Hashimoto) were a little over the top, but since the whole movie is just eye-candy anyway they seemed to fit.

The fight scenes among ruins got me. How can you not love Tomie jumping onto a swinging obelisk to smash a glass eye of a walrus-god idol that holds the very Key to Time itself, or sledding thru an ice cave being pulled by dogs? Or the scene where the villains jump through her castle windows as she grapples around the walls, smashing chandeliers and pistol-whipping bad guys? What's a girl to do but enduce guys to kill their girlfriends, and eventually herself, only to be resurrected that the cycle might be continually repeated? Well worth the effort to track down. Highly recommended.

I'm one who is a little confused by all of the negativity of this film. Some things are dated, such as the portrayal of Orca as man-eaters, etc. But it's a great thrill ride that is just fun to watch. I wouldn't mind it if they made more anti-American movies. Too bad about the countless lives that stem cell research could've saved, however ...


Hello. I have seen this movie. It was one of the better movies created about Tomie, the girl who'll never die... because she is bakemono.... Tomie, a girl who is picked on, is at a jewelry store looking, but has no money. Horrible Tomie comes in and steals it and they leave. They exchange names, and the Tomie who had no money is like IN LOVE with Horrible Tomie. That is pretty much the movie. Then you have these 3 dumb girls who want to kill Innocent Tomie but just be rude to her instead because they like having somebody to pick on. Anyway, it is a great movie and better than the other 2 that i've seen. GO SEE IT BECAUSE IT IS GREAT!


This post may contain spoilers.

Well, okay that's not really saying that much considering this "horror" series from Japan is not even close to being a "head" above anything else. I don't quite get the whole "forbidden fruit" thing... but at least it was over really quickly.

There are a few scenes that are very nice and romantic between the Tomie characters that may be worth a look. Mmm, Tomie's dad is probably thinking Tomie Love Sandwich! And who doesn't like Tomie's head in a handbag? Especially when it's kind of more like a torso with odd appendages.

Basically it's crap and you know it so just enjoy that for what it is worth.

Tomie will never die and, yes, it will hurt.

Tomie grade: F+


this is your typical teen movie...

there's just nothing great about this.

it's not scary either. the hanging body in the beginning didn't scare me at all. it seemed rather pretentious... and very predictable.

then nothing happens in a long time. the movie just lags..

the nerdy girl isn't particularly interesting.

tomie is kinda hot, but she doesn't show her tits in this flick... =D=D=D

i guess i've seen worse, but i would skip this one... don't rent it.

...


This is not your typical horror-gore film. In fact a lot of the horror is left to your imagination-that's one of the things I liked about this movie. True-the acting isn't perfect-but then again-most of the teens in this movie were just starting out. I do think the editing could have been better. But I did get creeped out by this movie and at the same time I got a kick out it! It's also campy and funny. Whether the director was going for campy/funny-I don't know-but I think that's what makes this film work. Most of the film takes place during the day which is also different. The good thing about that is that you're able to see what is going on. A lot of horror films take place at night or they are just so dark you can't see anything. Over all I think this is a decent indie horror/action/comedy movie.


HOT ROD HORROR www.myspace.com/hot_rod_horror Combining Murder, Ghosts & Hot Rods with a driving soundtrack ! You know they say that nothing great came out of Fresno; Besides raisins, This was until now with HRH. A nice collection of classic vehicles including Street Rods, Race Cars and a sweet motorcycle are used as props to enhance the authentic flashbacks. Let's talk about "AXEL", The main bad guyMaybe a ghost or demon and comes with some driving skills. I like the Willy O interpretation, I wanted some scary makeup on character but, Maybe the car he drives like possessed and the ghost-like nuances were enough, He had to act more than Robert Englund with mask. The stunts are pretty safe and then there was one, Done with a tire iron and blow torch, STEALS the whole movie and took a father and son stunt team to cook it ! Okay, Let's sum up to make this a Modern Cult Classic film, Guys get ahold of the Speed Channel on cable TV and sell this puppy to them, Talk with Autozone and get it carried in their stores by the counter and put Willy O and His Rat Rod on tour in car shows with copies of HRH to autograph/sell !


Just spent the afternoon viewing a horror double bill before heading out for the night. The Shining was the other movie - understandably, that film has an experienced director, cast, crew and a budget that yielded what it sowed: a horror masterpiece. Hot Rod Horror - the second on the double bill - is the complete opposite. It wasn't the fatigue of the double bill that made me dislike this. We watched Hot Rod Horror first as we had preconceptions of The Shining through its reputation and having read the book. The thing I didn't like about this is its weak structure, terrible direction and bad dialogue. I got the feeling that the cast were amateurs - some were OK, whilst the others seemed not to know what they were doing. There's simply no tension or horror in Hot Rod Horror - the car lot of junk was cool and the film being shot in daylight gave me the presumption that I had a Texas Chainsaw Massacre / The Hills Have Eyes on me hands. Unfortunately, there was nothing here - no thrills, no suspense, no fun - looks reasonably shot for a low budget, but there's nothing here to write home about.


With the development of film technology, anyone can knock out something visual for the 'entertainment' of others nowadays and at a next-to-nothing cost. Unfortunately, this has produced a load of tripe hitting the internet, and straight to release DVDs.

The makers of HRH (Hod Rod Horror - I've a feeling I'm gonna grow tired of writing this title in this review) are no exception; what they may have saved on using a scrapyard as the set to this movie (and used scrap for the rest of it), they've neglected to spend on entertainment value.

One of the main problems (there are many) with HRH is that the audience's appreciation for entertainment is neglected; and that is a big problem if you create anything to stimulate an audience. Not that the actors are solely to blame for this. However, the selection is a desperate one... especially the big, ambling, constipated, blonde (Stephanie Hoover) who seems to barely exist as a human and always needs to run off to find privacy either to 'pee' or to spew (yeah, 'tis natural, if seeing a corpse and feeling nauseous, to have to hold it in and find a place to chuck instead of being real and doing what comes naturally - to vomit on the spot).

When it comes to acting, what you discover in HRH, is a cast of amateurs (don't tell me that these individuals have studied acting - although Mark McPherson and Matt Severson do OK) thrown into a scrapyard and permitted to walk aimlessly around by a director who hasn't a clue to perform his main task... i.e. direct (just need to point that out to you, Darrell Mapson). Thus these dead beings wander and wonder around in a suspense-less environment, dramatically pursued by an incompetent 'menace' (ahem) of a ghost (ahem) whose role is to be hellbent on avenging his death 40-50 years earlier.

Now, the so called car, 'Hot' rod, that gives the main portion to the title of this movie is something to behold. Being less than tepid - I've seen lawnmowers move quicker... and that's an insult to garden tools - the movie consequently stumbles sluggishly along as the 'menacing' motor hunts down the kids, who, 'frozen' (through fear of acting, no doubt) 'try' to flee, joggingly quiet, dumb through fear (or is it through shock of being cast in such a crap movie?) into the next 'what do I do here, Mr Director' scene. Unintentionally amusing is one scene where the car runs over Jenny's cellphone. This is achieved with the 'Hot' rod slowing down (if that's possible) just to make sure it doesn't miss the phone in its tracks. Besides the car affecting the pace of HRH, are the aforementioned actors who aren't allowed to breathe and inject some life into this movie; as a result, there's little difference between the kids in their living and dead states - both are mute and stiff.

Others reasons for the poor acting and quality of HRH is the lame script everyone had to work with. Oh, if you check the credits, you'll notice that this is written by the same guy who portrays the menacing murderer, Axel (Willy Ortlieb). Why oh why didn't any of the cast or crew question the poor value of this scriptwriting? Lines are either unrealistic or just pointless... I guess there must have been a bit of nepotism going around concerning Mr Ortlieb's role in HRH (you'll also notice a couple of other Ortliebs in HRH too).

The editor, Lisa Donette May, is another culprit for the catastrophe that is HRH through neglecting to control the finished state of this movie: there are so many pointless scenes where nothing happens and thus slow down a no-go film. Lisa, what did you actually cut? This is not a Terrence Mallick film, where a scene can compose of stillness yet resonate in tranquility and beauty. It's a disaster, so 'cut to the chase' when you edit in future... pardon the pun.

Regardles of all these faults, I managed to strenuously watch all of HRH - just out of sheer curiosity to see what else could go wrong. One bit of advice: fast forward the 'Hot' rod scenes - just as a means to inject some life into that wagon and make that piece of junk move.... oh, and if you're going to have a ghost, maker of HRH, give 'im a car that'll not age: the whole thing's a rust bucket.. and so is this movie, which is an insult to films made on a cheap budget, but actually work!

PS: There are positive reviews to this movie, but as I sense they've been left by someone connected to HRH, I'd be very wary.


I'm not sure where anyone could find merit enough to give a movie this bad more than 3 stars at the most. It is total camp and filled with horrible acting. The story line itself wasn't that bad but the acting was so bad that at times it seemed like they were reading their lines from Que cards. The person or persons that own the wrecking yard has a gold mine though. The old Harley "Knucklehead" at the beginning of the movie was the only prop that was worth any real money. I have heard of shoestring budgets for making movies, this one is beyond broke. Glad I didn't pay money to see this flick, ugh. It gets a generous 3 out of ten.


Leonard Maltin is way off base on this one. He gave it one and a half stars and calls it an antique early talkie with a "miscast" Lew Ayres. Yes, it's an early talkie but it's a good one - as good if not better than SMART MONEY and on its way to being PUBLIC ENEMY just a year later. The story (the usual crime does not pay moral with some twists) is a good one, strong on character and deserved its Oscar nomination. Lew Ayres gives what I consider to be his best screen performance, as a young and intelligent crime boss. Cagney, sixth billed, is his henchman and here impresses no end - he is completely at home in the talkie medium with a performance full of nuances and naturalism. No wonder he headed right to the top.

Louie Ricarno (Ayres) organizes the various hoods in his city into a conglomerate to protect each others' interests and eliminate gang wars, which profit no one. Once he has achieved this he retires to marry and raise his kid brother, currently in a military academy. One hitch here is that the woman he marries is also sweet on his henchman, Steve Mileaway (Cagney) and the feeling is returned. All goes well until the mob starts to break apart and tries to lure Louie back to the city by attempting to kidnap his young brother. The kidnap attempt goes awry and the boy is killed. Louie, now hardened more than ever, returns to the city, swearing vengeance. I won't reveal the rest of the plot, but it is well acted and well characterized. True, the direction is sluggish and the other actors are not up to the professionalism of Ayres and Cagney, but it must take its place with the other early crime melodramas (FIVE STAR FINAL, LITTLE CAESAR, PUBLIC ENEMY, G-MEN) as being top of the line.


Much has been said about Lew Ayres being miscast in this film, but I don't agree. The notion that a pretty young boy can't be a gangster is belied both by Ayres' performance and by history itself--Pretty Boy Floyd, anyone? (I should add, however, that Jimmy Cagney, in his autobiography, agreed with those who believed Ayres was too pretty to play a convincing gangster!)

This film is so much better than you'd think, and that is due not only to fine performances by Ayres and Cagney (make that, a WONDERFUL performance by Cagney, who really does ignite the screen), but also to impressive direction by Archie Mayo. I confess I usually think of Mayo as a pretty journeyman director, but maybe I've only seen his later work and "talkies" spoiled him. If you were to watch this film without sound, you'd be hyper-aware of the wonderful camera set-ups and editing, particularly during the prison break, when the screen is filled with jump cuts of men's legs running. Of course, without the sound, you'll miss the great period dialogue (a gangland ambush offers Ayres the opportunity to "walk into a handful of clouds").

TCM shows this film from time to time, and you really shouldn't miss it. It's well-written, well-directed, has great performances, and the closing lines (displayed as a printed page of the source story on the screen) are as poignant as anything you'll ever read.


To see this movie on the Big Screen(like my Father,his uncles, and my Grandfathers did)would have been a treat. Well,not in my Dad's instance,because when my Dad saw the film on the Screen, it was shortly after Bogart's death and Cagney was already a long since established star.But still a treat nonetheless. Anyway for the Old oldtimers,they had to have the attitude:"This Cagney guy is gonna be around. Can't wait to see him again." Cagney always made his surroundings crackle with anticipation and uncertainty. You never really knew what was gonna happen. Doorway to Hell took risks. Real life gangsters dared Hollywood to make this movie because it hit close to home, for them. It's an interesting film to watch because of the miscasting. A thing William Wellman took note of during the filming of "Public Enemy", and had Cagney and the Lew Ayres clone "switch roles"...because "this Cagney guy has that gutter quality that this story needs to become effective". A must see movie.Especially for the buffs.


Though he drops a couple of notches in the screen credits from his first picture, "Sinners' Holiday", James Cagney still dazzles as a top mobster's second in command and hones the skills that will find him topping the bill for 1931's "The Public Enemy". Funny how Cagney's smart aleck attitude and mannerisms got him stereotyped as a gangster right out of the block, and he made it seem all so natural.

As for the story, Warner Brothers takes yet another stab at the menace to society theme with it's take on mob violence and competition between rival gangs. This was my first look at Lew Ayres, who heads the cast as crime boss Louie Ricarno. In an opening scene, he's out to 'teach a guy a lesson' for being a rat, and from there he sees an opportunity to bring all the local big shots together under his own umbrella. Though generally effective in the role, I did find it somewhat humorous when Ayres went into that surly pensive mood from time to time throughout the story. I also got a kick out of the scene in which Ricarno fancies himself as big a man as Napoleon, and Cagney does a mock impersonation of the dictator to the amusement of Louie's girl Doris (Dorothy Matthews).

With the back drop of Louie going straight and retiring to Miami with his new wife, the film throws a minor curve with the autobiography he's writing. I thought for sure that police captain Pat Grady (Robert Elliott - O'Grady in the credits) had it right when he offered the suggestion - "Don't write the last chapter till the night you go to the chair". Instead, knowing that there's no safe way out of the flop house he's holed up in, Louie gussies himself up for a 'handful of cloud'. The finale is effective for Warners' purposes, the fade out hones in on the rewritten last page of the Louie Ricarno story, the 'doorway to hell' swings only one way.

Keep a sharp eye and you'll catch a typo in the gangland slaughter headline of the newspaper Louie reads in the boarding house - it reads 'grewsome' for 'gruesome'.

For an early talking picture, I found the film to be fairly well written and acted, most of that contribution coming from the main principals, Ayres and Cagney. I would like to have seen a better resolution of the Ricarno/Mileaway relationship, particularly since Cagney's character just disappears after his 'confession', and even more so because of his heavily implicated fling with Ricarno's wife - very risqué stuff for the 1930's. The scene in the cab when she removes her ring probably brought a few gasps to audiences of the time, don't you think?


This is truly a great film and was very well produced considering it was in the early 30's. Lew Ayres(Louie Ricarno),"Calling Dr. Kildare",'38, was a crook trying to go straight and start a new life for himself and did everything to protect James Cagney,(Steve Mileaway),"The Public Enemy",'31, who was a fellow side kick in the rackets and was also fooling around with his wife. Louie's wife decided that by taking off her wedding ring it made it legal for her to fool around, which must have shocked the audiences of the 1930's. All these actors were just starting their careers in this film and gangster films were very popular. If you look close, you will also see Dwight Frye (Monk, a gangster),"Frankenstein",'31 and Ward Bond(a policeman that was uncredited in this picture) Ward Bond appeared in many of John Wayne Western Films. The producer of this film wanted the public to realize that "CRIME DOES NOT PAY".


A pretty good crime drama of its time, on a par with PUBLIC ENEMY, LITTLE CEASAR, and others of the genre,good acting, too.Excellent acting by a very young Lew Ayres, an up-and-coming yet unknown James Cagney, here listed way down in the cast of players as a secondary, and I particularly enjoyed the fine characterization by pre-Dracula Dwight Frye. Much better than the common, cheesy melodramas of the period,this one holds the interest better due to its inferences and unseen sub-plots, an early gem by director Archie Mayo, ahead of its time for its imaginative storyline, and great scene shots, a captivating film as a whole simply for standing out among the rest! Watch this one, it's very good!!


(There are Spoilers) Rarely seen and almost forgotten early gangster film that in fact was the first of the great crime motion pictures of the early 1930's, released before the big three "Little Caesar" "Public Enemy" and "Scarface", that put the "organize" into "organized crime".

Getting to the top of the heap of the Chicago Crime Syndicate through murder blackmail and payoffs, to the police politicians and judges,Louie Ricarno decides to get all the city's bootleg gangs united into one big operation with him of course in charge. Hesitant at first the leaders of the crime gangs soon see the genius of Ricarno's master plan in that they now can runs their illegal business's without the fear of being rubbed out by each other.

Feeling that there's nothing left for him to conquer, in the world of crime, Louie decides to retire, at the ripe old age of 22,and move to his estate in Forida to live out his life in peace and quite, with his new wife Doris, spending his time playing golf and writing his autobiography. There's also the fact that Louie's kid brother 12 year-old Jackie had been enrolled in the prestigious Fairfield Military Academy. Louie doesn't what Jackie to have anything to do with the kind of persons, gangsters, that he dealt with all his life.

It turns out that without Louie in charge the organization that he founded started to fall apart. In no time at all the gangs start to go a each other in an all out gang war ending up in danger of destroying themselves. Wanting to get Louie out of retirement and thus, with him back in charge, save what's still left of the organization two of his former colleagues the Midget and his partner in crime Gimpy try to kidnap little Jackie. The two hoods plan to hold him hostage in order to get Louis back in line. The blotched kidnap attempt only has the kid, in his trying to escape, get himself run down and killed in a tragic traffic accident.

With the news of Jackie's death Louie get's back to work as a crime chief and in no time at all blood is split on the streets of Chicago. Louie has his hoods gun Gimpy down and leave his body on the gutter as a warning to the now terrified Midget. That was to show the Midget just what's in store for him or anyone else who messes with either the "Great Louie Ricarno",the self proclaimed "Napoleon of Crime", or those like Little Jackie that he loves and cares about. While Louie is fixated on getting the Midget who's anything but, he stands at 5 foot ten inches and weighs about 280 pounds, his right hand man Steve Mileaway is playing around with Louie's wife Doris behind his back.

Eventually having the Midget iced, off camera, Louie becomes the prime suspect in his murder. With Louie being in the clear by providing an air-tight alibi for himself, in The Midget's untimely demise the police headed by the slow talking and barley awake, he looked like that at any moment he'll keel over and fall on his head, Captain Pat O'Grady need someone close to him to finger Louie in The Midget's murder. It's there where the double-crossing and scared of his, Louie's, shadow Steve Mileaway steps in.

Capt. O'Grady set Louie up in an elaborate plan, with the help of Louie's "good friend" Mileaway,that has him face and receive ultimate justice not from the police D.A or FBI but from his own kind the mob itself! A street-like Justice that he in fact meted out so many times to others is now what Louie Ricarno is to receive himself!


This is a very early talkie gangster film. Because it was made only a few years after talking pictures debuted, it suffers from a few defects that were related to the technology--such as an over-reliance on long shots--making the film look a bit "stagy". Additionally, background and incidental music in the film is noticeably absent. You really can't blame the filmmakers, as the technology was new and they still had to work out a few kinks, but it does make the film seem pretty dated and creaky. It wasn't until a year later that these two problems were pretty much eliminated in American films and even better gangster films like PUBLIC ENEMY and LITTLE CAESAR debuted.

The story itself is very interesting due to its cast. Lew Ayres, who had just made a name for himself in ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT, stars as a "nice" and "respectable" mob leader. Only late in the film do we see him unleash a wave of extreme violence. This is actually rather ironic considering that in real life, Ayres was strongly opposed to violence and when drafted in WWII, served as a medic because he was so morally opposed to taking lives! Also, this was only the second film for Jimmy Cagney. Since he wasn't an established star, it's not surprising he plays a supporting role though he already was being cast as a mobster in films.

The movie is in some ways a very typical Warner Brothers gangster film, though with one exception. Mob boss Ayres is a supposedly smart man and retires from the mob when he's still very young and able to enjoy the spoils of his work. But, when the gangs start fighting among themselves, he is reluctantly pulled back into the picture--leading to a rather dramatic conclusion. Interestingly, although the movie was pretty violent in spots and probably featured more gunfire than any film of the 30s, some of the key violent scenes are not seen but are only heard. An interesting idea no doubt spurred on by the new sound technology.


... even though many people complain that the role should have gone to Cagney. Ayres' baby-faced good looks and polished exterior were supposed to clash with the reality of the gangster that he was - that is part of the whole point of the film.

Ayres plays Louie Ricarno, a gangster who has decided to take the warring gangs of the city and run them like departments of a corporation of which he, of course, is president. In spite of some beefing by the other gangsters at first, in the long run this ends the in-fighting and all the gangsters make more money in the bootleg booze business and like the arrangement. Ricarno makes more money than any of them and this enables him to marry his dream-girl, retire, and live the life of a gentleman in Florida. At something like the tender age of 25 he is even writing his memoirs. However, he has two problems. First, you can take the girl out of the speak-easy (his wife) but you can't take the speak-easy out of the girl. Secondly, once Louie is retired, the same old in-fighting starts up again among the gangsters he left behind and they yearn for Louie to return and restore order. When he refuses, a couple of the gangsters cook up a plan to force him to return that goes horribly wrong and ends up killing someone close to Louie. Full of vengeance, Louie does return home, but not to restore order.

Cagney here has a minor role as right hand man to Louie and one-time boyfriend of Louie's now bored wife Doris. He's perfect in the role since his openly wise-guy exterior is in sharp contrast to Ayres' gee-whiz personna, in spite of the fact that they are equally violent.

Louie is a sympathetic character in many ways. He isn't someone who just picked crime as a career. Instead he grew up in poverty, lost his parents at a young age, lost two siblings to typhoid from bad milk, and just doesn't know any other way to live than dog eat dog. This doesn't excuse what he does, but it is something of an explanation. In this sense this film is ahead of its time in complexity. Also interesting is Louie's almost-friendship with Captain Pat O'Grady, the cop that is determined to get Louie and his gang off the street once and for all.


This was better than I had expected. Maybe not quite up there with Public Enemy and the original Scarface, but not that far behind.

The acting is pretty good for an early talkie. Cagney is great as usual as the head gangster's top henchman. Lew Ayres acts well as the head guy, "the Napoleon of crime", although he's perhaps a little too cleancut looking for the role.

The story is good, and rather dark. Mobster Louie Ricarno, after uniting all the gangs in Chicago under one organization, tries to quit crime. But things fall apart in his absence, and he's forced to return for purposes of revenge. The ending is nicely grim and while there might be enough of a "crime doesn't pay" moral to keep the censors happy it doesn't rub it in your face. There's some good gangster violence along the way.- a number of well-done hits, and an over- the-top scene that resembles a full-scale battle.

Two other things struck me as memorable: The adulterous relationship between Cagney and his boss' wife. At one point, she takes off her wedding ring, and then they "go somewhere".

The police captain, O'Grady, is a rather ruthless character. He blackmails Cagney into a false confession for a crime he didn't commit, by threatening to tell Ayres about his affair with Ayres's wife! Later, he lets Ayres's rivals bump him off, rather than prosecute him and risk an acquittal. It also is implied that O'Grady's rejection of bribes is more the exception than the rule among police officials.

It pays to watch this movie closely, as there is a lot that is implied and innuendoed.


When I refer to the 'Big Three' I am of course referring to the holy trinity of early 1930's gangster flicks: Little Caesar, The Public Enemy & Scarface.

Firstly, this is NOT a James Cagney movie. It's a Lew Ayres movie in which James Cagney, (In only his second movie), is amongst the great supporting cast and based on this performance it was easy to see the star in the making.

Lew Ayres plays Louie Ricarno, a bootlegging gangster determined to get rich or die trying. Cagney plays Mileaway, his right hand man who's character seems to be well named as whenever any of the action takes place in the movie, Cagney seems to be a 'mile away' from it, as it's one of the few Cagney movies made where he doesn't either kill, mame or even hit anyone.

After a series of tit-for-tat murders between rival gangs, Ricarno calls a meeting with all his rival bosses and proposes that in return for them declaring him ultimate boss, he will protect their operations from any rival gang who may try to encroach on their areas. One wonders whether Charles 'Lucky' Luciano ever saw this movie and used this element of it's plot as his blueprint for the 'syndicate' which he adopted after the murder of crime boss Salvatore Maranzano a year later.

After a period of profitable peace for all involved, Ricarno feels that he's made enough money to quit the rackets for good and go straight. His two main reasons for this life style U turn, is his new wife Doris, (Dorothy Mathews), (who unbeknown to him is having a passionate affair with his best friend Mileaway), and his young Brother Jackie, played brilliantly by Leon Janney. Louie doesn't want Jackie to either follow in his footsteps or even rub shoulders with the ne'r-do-well's he does.

It's not long after louie's departure that old gang fueds come to the fore once more and gangland killings escalate. In order to incite Louie back to the city, two gangsters plot to kidnap Jackie only to release him when Louie returns. However, the kidnapping is botched as Jackie, who blessed with intelligence of his brother, smells a rat. In his bid to escape, he is knocked over and killed by a passing truck.

On hearing the news, Louie, now driven solely by vengeance on the would be kidnappers, returns to his old turf, but peace & profits are the last thing on his mind, and you half expect him to utter Al Pacino's memorable line "Just when I thought I was out....they pull me back in"

Ayres, although brilliant in his role was probably miscast, especially when you had the best movie tough guy in world playing the lead's sidekick. (A mistake they nearly duplicated with The Public Enemy until the producers woke up).

One let down of the movie was the rivalry between Ayres and fellow gang boss Rocco (Noel Madison), I feel the bitterness between the two needed to be brought out in the plot a little more. Sadly, because they didn't do this, the movie is robbed of any REAL menacing villain.

The Pre-code element was also very risqué and the fact that the affair between Cagney's & Mathews's chaarcters was so obviously sexual, must have had all at the Hays office pulling their hair out.

Like in most early talkies, many cast members seem to struggle with adapting to the new medium, such as adopting wild animated body gestures as they would have done in silent pictures and also speaking terribly slowly as they were so often told to do. Luckily both Ayres & Cagney are on hand to show them that you didn't need to speak three words a minute to be understood on film.

Doorway to Hell is a great early Warner's gangster movie and worth giving a go.

Enjoy!


The Doorway to Hell is yet another step up the ladder for James Cagney as the Brothers Warner discover that the guy they signed for a one shot deal to repeat his stage role from Penny Arcade was in fact future star material. He was certainly unlike some of the classical emoting stars from the silent period, unlike anything that ever had been on screen before.

Lew Ayres is the lead in this film, Cagney's his chief henchman. Ayres is an ambitious guy who's determined to bring a little organization to the bootleg booze business in his city. And then as soon as he gets it going, he quits. He wants to spend time on the golf course and with his new wife. The wife, Dorothy Matthews, is bored with early retirement mainly because she's been two timing Ayres with Cagney and Cagney's not around.

The story is pretty silly in any number of ways. First the various mob heads resent Ayres taking over, then they resent when he leaves. Secondly, it's not made clear at all why Cagney isn't capable of running this thing by himself, he sure looks capable enough. And the plot where two of the gangsters have the brilliant idea to kidnap Ayres's little brother from military school to bring him back is frighteningly stupid.

Ayres, Cagney, Matthews and the rest muddle through this dumb mess. Ayres was already a star due to All Quiet on the Western Front. And Cagney you had no doubt was going to be a star if the right vehicle was found for him. Even if Cagney had been in Ayres's role, I'm not sure The Doorway To Hell would have been it.


Forget From Russia With Love - this is probably the greatest Spy movie ever made (and it's Italian, too) - the 1967 screen debut of the great and tragically neglected Neil Connery, playing the brother of the world's most famous secret agent, the lip-reading hypno-plastic surgeon Dr Neil Connery, along with Adolfo Celi, Daniela Bianchi, Bernard Lee, Lois Maxwell, Anthony Dawson and, of course, Gina Lollobrigida's brother, Guido. But it's Neil who's the real star: Sean, Roger, Pierce, Timmy, George - none of them can do the standing still bit as well as Neil. One critic at the time said that if the producers had bought a two-headed pygmy, put him in a glass case and charged admission it would have been less cruel than what they did to Neil Connery, but don't you believe it.

True, the first half hour or so is a bit on the slow side, but once it gets going, it just keeps on getting better and better. There's a glamorous Bond girl called Mildred ("I've ordered Mildred to flirt with Dr Connery"); an obviously soused Bernard Lee in an ill-fitting suit he could well have slept in; baddies who can't afford the natty boiler suits that SPECTRE employees get so have to make do with berets and Burgundy C&A jumpers; blind Arabs being forced to make radioactive rugs ("You're working with radioactive materials. They will kill you!" "What is it that you are trying to say?" Pause: "You're working with radioactive materials. They will kill you!"); Neil Connery imitating one of the aforementioned blind Arabs while Adolfo Celi fights a losing battle to keep a straight face; Dr Connery, on seeing a man with a bloody great dagger sticking out of his heart noting "This man is dead. There's nothing more I can do for him."; teen ravers playing their crazy happening sounds on the runway of Malaga airport for no particular reason; a Lesbian torturer who makes Lotte Lenya look like Cameron Diaz telling a Japanese girl that if she tells her what she wants to know, "I'll reward you with pleasures beyond your imagination. You can live with me in a palace!"; the villains' henchwomen hijacking an 'atomic nucleus' by dressing up as can-can girls stranded in the desert; a 120-second countdown that is long enough for someone to run away, escape the villains' lair, fly a helicopter along the longest road in Europe, land, get out, go to a café and phone Londonn (in the days before direct international dialling) before it gets to 35 seconds on the clock; and a climax that sees a group of Scottish championship archers riding to the rescue through the snow to the villain's underground lair, the entrance to which is cunningly disguised as a small hut opposite a castle a few miles outside Munich.

Oh, did I forget the Ennio Morricone title song, 'OK Connery' ("You're the one for me!")? And the fact that the finale includes the line "Twin vibrators inserted"? Or that the villain's plot to render all mechanical devices useless via a magnetic pulse is the same as GoldenEye? I tell you, Casino Royale has a lot to live up to...

Forget Antonioni, Fellini and Visconti: this is Italian cinema at its finest.


"Do you ever walk upright like other people?" Neil Connery says to a sexy Eurobabe who's on all fours looking for a lost lighter. I love this movie. The sheer number of super-sexy actresses in Operation Kid Brother is staggering. Some enterprising video company should locate the negative and make a deal to put it on DVD in a widescreen version. The Ennio soundtrack is tremendous. You have to wonder why the man was never invited to contribute to a Bond film. Operation Kid Brother is more entertaining than all of the Bond films released since Diamonds Are Forever. I'll add Casino Royale to the list as soon as I see it. The big question is how come Neil Connery didn't speak at the American Film Institute's tribute to Sean Connery last year. Did Sean show the bouncers a photo of Neil and tell them to keep him out at all costs? Lois Maxwell got to do more in this movie than in every Bond film she made and she looks better too, strangely enough. It's a blast to see Dawson and Celi acting side by side. It was probably in Celi's contract that he gets to feel up the actresses. You have to wonder if Cubby Broccoli and Harry Saltzman didn't go ape when Bernard Lee and Maxwell turned up in this.


Sure, Neil Connery is a bit of dud both as an actor and a character. The rest of the movie, though, is a hoot to watch. That isn't something you can say about "real" Bond movies like, say, _The Man with the Golden Gun_. Even Sean Connery could be boring. Can you remember anything about _You Only Live Twice_ aside from a few action sequences? Go ahead, I dare you. Nor is the plot of _O.K. Connery_ any less preposterous than most Bond movies'.

If nothing else, it's got Adolfo Celi in a smoking jacket strutting around with a cigar and supervillainous music backing him up. More than worth the price of admission.


If you're a fan of the Euro-spy movies made in the 60s, how can you not just love Operation Double 007? Using the success of James Bond as a model, those crazy Italians certainly made some crazy spy movies. This one stars Sean Connery's brother, Neil Connery (who plays a character cleverly named Neil Connery) as a plastic surgeon / hypnotist / lip reader. With tongue firmly in cheek, we also learn that Neil is the brother of a famous spy and, as his brother is unavailable, the government wants Neil to stand in and give them a hand. Before you can say Dr. No, Neil's up to his neck in beautiful women, a super-villain with a nuclear device, the obligatory henchmen, archers on horse back, gun fights, car chases, blind Arab rug-weavers, can-can dancers, explosions, underground lairs, and a Japanese woman kidnapped by the world's most vicious nun/nurse. Don't worry, it all makes sense in the end (well, sort of anyway). Besides, if there's a loose end here or there, who cares when you're having this much fun.

Joining Connery in the cast is a plethora of Bond vets including Daniela Bianchi, Adolfo Celi, Bernard Lee, and Lois Maxwell. It's a real treat to see them all in a different setting. In particular, it's great to see Lois Maxwell out from behind that desk she always sat at in the Bond movies. Here, she's not only gets out in the field, but she gets the chance to mow down baddies with a machine gun as well. Celi, always the bad guy in a movie like this, looks like he's having the time of his life. There's at least one scene where it's not hard to notice a small smile come to his face and you've got to wonder how close he came to losing it. But as much as I enjoyed both of these fine actors, I was particularly impressed with the work of Daniela Bianchi from From Russia with Love fame. In Operation Double 007, she gets to play both the good and bad girl, wear some over-the-top outfits, and look generally fabulous. It's a shame she didn't go on to do more after this movie. She had a definite screen presence about her.

There are some out there who want to label Operation Double 007 a "James Bond rip-off". It's not a rip-off, it's a parody  and a good one at that. Operation Double 007 was released the same year as the more famous Bond parody Casino Royale. The big difference is that Casino Royale is one big, bloated mess of a movie that's rarely funny. Operation Double 007, on the other hand, is a blast. In fact, and this may be blasphemous to some, but it's more fun than about half of the Bond movies. It's too bad it's never had a proper R1 DVD release so that more people might discover this movie. The only way I've seen the movie is courtesy of a DVD-R of the Mystery Science Theater 3000 episode on which it appeared. It's a great episode, but I would love to see a good release without the bots and their comments.


So 007 has a brother, who is a Doctor, that some how gets talked into taking on a super badguy organization called Thanatos. He also happens to know Judo and knows techniques to induce the deepest states of trance possible (and that most men would kill to know). This organization plans to steal "Atomic Nucleus'" by woman poisoning MP's, and then raiding a highly secured facility dressed as...cats? I admit I watched the MST3K version of this, but it probably saved me from turning if off. That being said, there wasn't much about this movie that made sense from the word go.

I found and watched this during a bout of insomnia one evening. I slept like a baby afterwards.


MASTER PLAN: Operation Blackmail - controlling the world's gold reserves. A very calculated attempt to copy & make money off the James Bond craze of the sixties, this comes off as a silly joke, maybe intentionally. It's similar to "Licensed to Kill," the 'Charles Vine' Bond cheap copy, but less creative. The plot can be deduced from an alternate title, "Operation Double 007" - that's not a typo - the spy agency of the Bond world requests the services of 007's brother; hence, this is about 007's double (they never completely finish saying '007' out loud, always stopping short of voicing the '7' - ha). 007's brother is played by Sean Connery's real life brother, Neil, with a goatee and a talent for hypnotism. This starts off badly, with Neil Connery, playing a famous genius plastic surgeon, explaining his advanced techniques and how he combines them with Tibetan mind control - it's pathetic drivel - and then some mêlée breaks out. It's groan-inducing. But, the main attraction is for film buffs and Bond fans making all the connections with the real Bond films.

All the main actors (besides N.Connery, whose connection to Bond is already explained) in this one are from one or more James Bond movies. Celi, as the main villain, played a similar role in "Thunderball" (Celi, who looks like an overweight banker, was always playing villains or gangsters in the sixties). Bianchi, the femme fatale, was in "From Russia With Love." Dawson was in "Dr.No." Of course, Bernard Lee (aka M) and Lois Maxwell (aka Ms.Moneypenny) were from most of the Bond films of the sixties and seventies. They duplicate their roles from those here, though Maxwell gets a chance to run around shooting a gun, something she never had a chance to do with her 'receptionist' role in the Bonders. The villains seem to be SPECTRE, though they're referred to by another name, Thanatos, who plan to use some kind of magnetic waves to imbalance the world. The other strange and amusing aspect is that some of the main characters are referred to by their real names (Dr.Connery, Ms. Maxwell, etc.) rather than as Mr.Bond - get it? It's goofy, somewhat dull and a curiosity. Hero:3 Villains:3 Femme Fatales:4 Henchmen:2 Fights:3 Stunts/Chases:3 Gadgets:3 Auto:3 Locations:4 Pace:2 overall:3


I thank the heavens for MST3000, otherwise this movie would have been intolerable. It is a communal pain, distributed among the watchers. First of all, the protagonist is Dr. Neil Connery, played by Neil Connery (subtle). Neil is Sean Connery's brother. You would not guess that from the great acting displayed in this movie. This movie is simply an Italian knock-off of a James Bond movie, except you couldn't afford any of the trademarks. They also managed to get some people who actually stared in Bond movies, like Ms. Moneypenny (Lois Maxwell), M (Bernard Lee), and Emilio Largo (from Thunderball played by Adolfo Celi). Thats about where all the similarities to any Bond movie end. Where James Bond has a suave, debonair style and uses various gadgets, his brother Neil, user hypnosis and the Jerry Lewis approach. It's not that he is clumsy, he just seems to be uncomfortable with women. The plot is pretty bad and nonsensical. By far the best part of the movie is the end conflict, where Neil and friends fight "Largo's" minions, who dress like the aliens from V (red vinyl outfits) with the helmets from the fireman of Fahrenheit 451. Not only that, but they are all shooting underwater harpoons. Exciting isn't it ?? This all leads to the duel between "Largo" (aka Thair Beta) and Neil. Harpoons at 20 paces. This movie is bad. Please don't watch this movie, unless you are heavily medicated.


This really poor James Bond rip-off stars Sean Connery's talentless, charismaless, weird-faced brother Neal, my candidate for the Lowest Self Esteem award (beating even Clint Howard!). Neal plays "Dr. Neal Connery", a plastic surgeon, hypnotist, lip reader, and kung-fu fighter (what, is he Buckaroo Banzai?). Constant references are made to Neal's brother (although not by name, as that might cost money) as Neal takes part in a stunningly uninteresting, slightly diabolical plot to do... something, I think. Action includes a bow-and-arrow fight and a "Every Which Way But Loose"-style brawl at one of Connery's live surgery demonstrations.

Adding to the shame are Bond regulars Bernard Lee (more attractive than Judi Dench as M) and Lois Maxwell (Miss Moneypenny), as well as Daniela Bianchi ("From Russia With Love") and Adolfo Celi (of "Thunderball"- and "Diabolik"!).

Not to be watched by people with functioning eyes, although the music's pretty good.


I checked this out through MST3K (as most have already pointed out). To tell the truth, I was pretty excited... being a huge Bond fan, and loving the small Bond roles like in OHMSS, but this was worse than B-Film "comedy". Allow me to lay out the plot of this fiasco:

Sneaking dealings arise when Largo/Diabolico surfaces and kidnaps a patient of Dr. Connery. Apparently, Bond's brother (as mentioned by M) is a plastic surgeon with the special ability to hypnotize unsuspecting people Jedi style (within 2-3sec). For some ungodly reason, I suppose the real Bond was busy with more important things (I'd like to think getting plastered on a remote island). So, the MOD hires his brother to discover what's going on.

Before you know it, Dr. Connery is taking out electric fence perimeters with a bow and arrow, showgirls in the middle of nowhere manage to take out an army convoy, and blind Arabs are weaving radioactive carpets. One may wonder where this will lead, well, Largo manages to unleash an EMP (they just called it a magnet) on a small mountain town in the Alps. At this point, I'm sure nobody would care, but no, a squad of horsemen with bows and arrows somehow appear and storm the enemy base.

In the end, the day is saved by the dud, and he settles in by somehow managing to get a whole ship of women under his charm (more mind tricks I'm sure cause the desperate brother couldn't con his right hand into charm).

Q, or someone pretending to be him, never makes an appearance, but you can expect three fine spy gadgets in this film: a bow with a spool, a knife that shoots its blade(used by a female villain, and also may I add a useless weapon compared to say... a gun), and a belt that becomes stiff for throwing as a javelin *rolls eyes*.

Any Bond fan should vier away from ever being disgusted by this movie.


It's cheesy good fun in this blissfully goofy Italian romp 'starring' the amazingly untalented younger brother of Sean Connery, Neil. I love the fact that in this spy film they refer to his brother as the greatest agent of Britain, but they're referring to Sean Connery, not James Bond! That's because they couldn't get the rights to use the Bond name in the film, although Sean seems to have been amenable to his own name used. Probably thought it was a good joke.

Neil's a plastic surgeon, of all things, who gets drawn into a spy caper because of his work with hypnosis. One of his patients apparently knows too much, and so is kidnapped by the (almost exclusively female) agents of an organization called THANATOS. Also starring in this amusing pastiche is the fleshy guy who played in Diabolik as the crime lord who utters the memorable words:"Is that Stud, coming?" while on his boat. he plays another fleshy crime lord in this one, and the most unappealing part of this film is watching the beautiful young women who surround him on his yacht(a yacht again? What's with this guy!) massage him and wait in him hand and foot.

The theme song is a hoot, proving once again that Morricone is the King of Corny. The addled plot line never quite comes up to scratch, but that's o.k. The real reason for the movie is displayed about three quarters of the way through, when the stunning boat babes get into a wrestling match/fight with the male sailors on board the yacht. The movie just goes to show you that a movie is all about the details-which this one manages to get all wrong, but in such a way as to leave you gasping with laughter. Thank God for cheap Italian films, which have provided us with so much mirth over the years. Oh, and Clint Eastwood, of course.


This one is primarily interesting to those who like to study the early American sound films. Others may find themselves nodding off.

Since I am a follower of this period of film I stayed with it. As a very early example of sound film (1929)it has a lot in common with other films shot at the time: dreadful script, wooden acting, and no background music. The rule for speaking at the time must have been "speak slowly and with great emphasis". The result is an unnatural, stiff and sometimes hilarious delivery.

Most of the films shot around this time were shot with multiple cameras covering a variety of angles, but all running at the same time so that the scene could be played without stopping. Interestingly, this seems to have been one of the early attempts at using one camera shooting an angle at a time and then using editing to make the scene move. This is course the technique that would become standard in later years. So I give the producers credit for taking the time to assemble the film in a more cinematic and less theatrical style.

One side note. This film was shot using the RCA Photophone sound process, where the sound is recorded on a separate strip of film optically. During the editing process they apparently had not yet developed a way to make the splices on the sound-track noiseless. So every time a cut is made you can hear a little pop on the sound. This would be corrected fairly quickly, but this one may have been made to satisfy the public's insatiable appetite for sound films and rushed to market.

Slow, creaky, and of it's time, but interesting to me anyway.


I came in expecting to get some pleasure out of this picture; between the Mal St. Clair direction, the George Abbott script and some interesting talent in front of the camera, it looked pretty good on paper.

However, although the script still looks good -- the corruption of an honest boxer -- there are far too many issues to make it enjoyable.

Stagey Acting: a frequent problem of 1929 an issue of the relatively primitive sound equipment and non-naturalistic stage technique, this would be corrected in a couple of years. None of which excuses the fact that people at a party just stand around doing nothing.

Leaden Camera: It's about ten minutes into the film before the camera moves at all, and then it's moved very slightly to maintain composition, but in an incredibly clumsy fashion, like one man trying to move a sofa. Otherwise it's just cut and cut and cut, two shot, reaction shot, two shot, reaction shot. Compare the vast majority of these shots with the boxing sequence, which is shot MOS with very mobile camera and a lot of undercranking.

Mal St. Clair, after working with Chaplin, developed a reputation as a great director with a light touch -- certainly his Rin-Tin-Tin features are good. But he shows absolutely nothing here. Still it's an interesting story and that stops it from being unwatchable. It's just that you have a lot better things do with your time.


... and that's why I'd recommend you skip it, even if you're an early sound film buff, as I am. Neither the script nor the acting are particularly bad for an early talkie, it's just that everything and everyone in this paint-by-numbers film about the boxing world is so completely conventional and forgettable. Bad films I'd recommend from the early sound era would be "Golden Dawn" or "Lights of New York" because they are so horrid in places that they wind up being fun for the early talkie fan.

There are, however, a few interesting facts involving this early talkie film:

1. There is no parade in this film, although a good portion of the action does take place at night. The film was renamed "Night Parade" to capitalize on the success of some other films of the time that had the word "Parade" in the title.

2. Aileen Pringle, who plays Paula Vernoff, the bad girl that tries to lure the boxer down the wrong path, actually had a pretty good range as an actress, although she shows none of that here. She had some good roles in the silent era, but approaching 40, she got increasingly smaller parts as the 1930's wore on.

3. Famed dancer Ann Pennington actually shows up as herself and dances one number. The film is well-preserved enough that we get a good look at her talents and those famous knees of hers. This is a rare thing to have on film.

4. Male lead Hugh Trevor, who plays wayward boxer Bobby Martin, died in 1933 at only the age of 30 due to complications after an appendectomy. This is one thing I notice over and over in these old films - relatively young people dying of infections and car accidents that they most likely would have survived had they lived today. It really puts the passage of time in perspective.

5. Finally, for this to be such an old and a mediocre film it really is in excellent shape. The sound and video are largely unscathed from the passage of time, which is rare for the RKO film library in general.


Please understand that my score of 7 is based on when it was made. Had this film appeared just a few years later, I would not have been as charitable. It's just that for an early silent is IS pretty good.

There were several reviews that complained about the sound, but actually compared to so many films from 1929, this was was excellent and the acting was actually pretty good. First, you could actually hear them talking without much straining--and this CAN'T be said of films like COQUETTE (also 1929). Second, while there isn't the incidental music, this is true of just about every film in 1929. Also, while a few of the actors were dreadful (particularly "the champ"), the film was far less static than most of the early sound era. The characters in some films made at that time stood almost wood-like and shouted up towards the microphones--this one never is that bad. Had you not known how bad most 1929 and even 1930 films were, then I could see you complaining about the sound. Believe me, though, the sound in this is excellent.

As for the film itself, many will find themselves laughing at the plot--after all, just about every boxing film cliché is present. However, please understand that most of the films featuring these clichés borrowed them from NIGHT PARADE. When it appeared in 1929, the clichés weren't yet clichés and this style of sports film was the rage. Today, though, it will seem pretty old fashioned and predictable.

If I would rate this film for historical purposes, it deserves an 8. If I write it for watchability today, then it probably deserves a 5. While predictable, there still was some charm and I liked the locker room fight scene with Pops. However, I will admit that as a true cinephile and lover of silents and early talkies, I am a bit biased and tend to overlook many of the problems with these transitional films. To see more technically competent films, you really won't see too many until 1931 or 1932. Heck, in Europe and Japan they were STILL making silents until the early to mid-30s.


Betrayal is a B movie all right, but it has a plot with interesting angles and delivers good entertainment, some suspense and many hilarious moments. The main character is a teenager with a low IQ but a high sense of responsibility  in short an Anti James Dean. His mother, a single mom, is totally broke and he wants to help them get out of their misery. So he takes on a job: delivering bags he does not know what's in them. Even the first delivery goes wrong because the boy wants to help a guy who is writhing and retching on the ground. It's a trap and the boy sees the bag snatched away from him because he showed empathy.

He goes back to mom, after a while the gangsters shoot into the house and the boy tells his mom everything and says that he is sorry. Mom says it's bad, but that she is even MORE sorry than he (this exchange seems to be inspired by Dr. Strangelove and is repeated several times throughout the movie). They decide to flee to granny who is living far away, but have not the money to buy a train ticket. Luck strikes as in the queue in front of the railroad ticket office they meet a sexy young lady who says she had her driver's license removed, wants to travel to the same destination and offers them to finance a rental car )which is terribly unreliable, as it will turn out). Big, big coincidences, but not entirely impossible or unbelievable.

The sexy lady is, of course, a contract killer who carries millions in cash in her aluminum suitcase and is pursued by the police and the mob she stole the money from. Mom and son are used as a shield, and the son gets some sexual education on the way. That this weird triangle works so well can be credited to the involved actors who do a good job. Especially Jeremy Lelliott is very convincing, he is quite likable and displays the necessary goofiness for the part.

A lot more happens in this movie, coincidences abound and the good people win in the end. My favorite scene is the son's coming home to the deserted house he and his mom supposedly have left for an undetermined but certainly pretty long time. He carries the aluminum suitcase with its precious content and is pursued by the mob, the corrupt police, the honest police and the sexy lady who is a killer. But he quietly goes to the fridge, takes out a ready to eat dinner and switches the TV on, where just that moment, just on that channel there is some news about the mob, the sexy lady killer, his mom and their exchange. Speak of an ideal situation. Life really should be that way, sometimes.

You single moms out there, take an example from this movie, do hide a revolver in the exhaust hood of your kitchen too  just in case. It might come in handy, as Betrayal amply proves. And the gun will remain well greased over any length of time.


BETRAYAL is terrific little crime actioner, a Mark Lester job, that entertains from beginning to end. A lethal lady, played by sexy Parisian actress Julie Du Page, is on the run with a million bucks of mob money. Several people, including a police detective played by Adam Baldwin of SERENITY fame, are hot on her trail. She ends up in the company of a mom (the luscious Erica Eleniak) and her teenage son (Jeremy Lelliott), and all hell breaks loose when the son finds the money. Plenty of people die, there are some car chases, and the ending features a decent cat fight between the two Eleniak and Du Page. I am with those who think Eleniak deserves better roles than she normally gets, but better she is working than not at all. "B" movie stalwart James Remar plays an FBI agent who hooks up with Eleniak, although he is given little to do. The focus is on the two extremely beautiful women, which was fine with me. Du Page has a shower scene, guys.


I gave this a rating of 4, and that was being generous.

The film starts with a bang. However, it becomes quickly confusing since a man called Frank gets killed towards the beginning of the film, but then either he or some other man named Frank become quite central to the plot, shortly afterwards.

Surely they did not have two characters with the same name? I don't know, I never could figure that part out.

Anyway, the story, such as it is, revolves around two women. Jayne, who is a "cleaner", who has killed around 20 people or so in her career, and Mom and her teenage son.

Mom is a divorcee who apparently gets no child support, and manages her money so poorly she has let her house mortgage build up to over $3,000. She whines about it so much to her sixteen year old son, he feels compelled to do something about the problem.

Son is a novice, however, in the criminal world, and ends up losing a big package of cocaine he was delivering.

Son's fed up boss comes by that night and shoots out the windows in the house. Mom & son survive by getting down on the floor. This is followed by Mom asking son if he got the license plate number.

I would have LOVED to have had the kid reply: "Well, not hardly, Mom, since you had my face pressed to the carpet the entire time."

Another cute thing is when they return to the house later in the film, the shot-out windows are completely undamaged! The film has a few of these kinds of little glitches, along with the characters doing things that make you say: Huh? Why would he do that? How would she know that?

Eventually Mom, son & Jayne intersect, and are traveling together in a car with hitmen on their trail.

I was quite disappointed in the actress playing the hitwoman. She was supposed to be beautiful as well as deadly, but she was very unattractive.

It would have been better if the actresses' roles had been reversed as the one playing the Mom was much better looking.


"Lady Jayne:Killer" is a bottom of the barrel B-flick from the get go. You only have to scan the roster to see the personnel are a bunch of B-listers and maybe seeing ex-Playmate Eleniak get naked is the most one can hope for. Unfortunately, this lame flick doesn't even deliver a little gratuitous T&A as it limps along though its trite and cliche-ridden story about a beautiful hitwoman, a bunch of money, and a broke mom and son destined for a showdown. Pretty awful stuff not worth the time. (D+)


This film was a surprise because I came across it on the Lifetime Movie Network and watched a few minutes to kill some time before another program began and found myself entertained. First of all, what rescues this from being standard direct to video fare is the direction of action film helmer Mark L. Lester. In addition, the cast which includes James Remar and Adam Baldwin, has some underrated talent in it. Most surprising of all is the dynamic between Julie Le Page as the hit woman with the lam and former "Baywatch" babe, Erika Eleniak as a single mother with her troubled teenage son on road trip to her mother's place in Texas. Julie hits all the right notes as the manipulative, sociopathic hit woman who regards the unwitting mother and son as ride over the state lines with a stash of a million dollars. The female characters are strong, Julie, physically and Eleniak as the mother fighting for her son's life and makes the film very compelling. The road movie through the desert crime caper is nothing new nor original ("Thelma and Louise," anyone) but the performance of the sexy Le Page and the twist of ruthless hit woman teamed up with single mom trying to do the right thing brings a very interesting dichotomy to what could have been an otherwise forgettable film.


Yes, Betrayal is a B-thriller. Though, the opening sequences hint a sort of 80s made-for-TV movie quality, which this movie might've done better as. That, or, if the writing had been strong enough, a psychopath exploitation movie of the 60s and 70s. Instead, Betrayal is poorly written, and at times, poorly acted.

Here, the stories of two groups of people collide. On the one hand is the seductive Jayne, a ruthless hit-woman who settles a contract for a mob boss, but then decides to run off with money meet her partner somewhere in Texas. She's quick with a gun and has a "nuclear weapon between her legs," so the henchmen have no easy task ahead of them trying to get to her. On the other hand, you have a seemingly quaint mother and teen son who are heavily in debt. So, the bonehead son (and this is not his first of flubs), having connections to street thugs, decides to help his mother by delivering some cocaine for a gangster. Only, he is jumped and the stash is stolen. And the gangster thinks that the son tried to rip him off (though, other than a drive-by shooting, he doesn't seem convinced enough to stick around looking for him). So his mother decides that now, they have to flee to Texas to stay with her mother. So of course, they cross paths with Jayne who concocts a story so she can hitch a ride with them. And now they have mafia, crooked cops, and the FBI on their tail... the chase is on.

Only, despite the forced meeting of the characters, the movie might've been more enjoyable B-movie fare if the events transpired in a more believable way. Given, the scenes between the mother and son at the train station, you'd think it was just another day they were going to visit grandma rather than the necessity to flee from a gangster looking for his stash of cocaine. There are also several opportunities for them to escape from Jayne just as there are opportunities for the hit men to kill Jayne. As the movie progresses, things proceed almost haphazardly as though it were a light dress rehearsal. In absence of the budget for greater action sequences like chase scenes and the like, the writing should have at least been much stronger.


The story line would have been good if the actors especially the lead, Emily Shaw, didn't over act so much! What happened to her anyway?? I don't know what happened to the former baywatch girl but she looks terrible in this movie, that unibrow really needs to go!

In this movie the main characters totally overacted making it difficult to watch! Don't waste your time with this one! It isn't worth a full "one" vote! Late night cable for a reason, no one wants to see this!

This was one of the worst movies I have ever wasted my time watching! What teenager acts this way? Totally unbelievable! But what can you expect for low budget!


Claude Chabrol's international reputation was cemented by a sequence of enduring films dating from the late sixties and early seventies, of which "Le Boucher" is one of the most famous. The influence of Henri-Georges Clouzot is apparent here, the provincial school setting recalling "Les Diaboliques". "Le Boucher" though, is first and foremost quintessential Chabrol, and as such it's less concerned with plotting than either Clouzot or Hitchcock, another cinematic forebear, the focus more specifically being the interior psychological states of his protagonists.

Helene (Stéphane Audran) and Popaul (Jean Yanne) meet at a wedding and strike up an instant friendship. She's the local schoolmistress and he's the village butcher, recently returned from 15 years in the army having served in Algeria and Indochina. He's evidently scarred by the violence he's seen and also by his relationship with a cold, unloving father who seemed to be the reason he left France in the first place. Helene too bears scars from the past, apparently dating back to a relationship ten years previously which ended badly, the trauma forestalling any further emotional entanglements. Thus, Helene and Popaul become tentatively attached without any subsequent physical consummation of their relationship. Against the backdrop of this, a series of killings of young women is taking place in the vicinity, and Helene has reason to believe that Popaul may be responsible. Yet curiously, she doesn't inform the police of her suspicions, nor does she confront Popaul. While she may be in some danger, therefore, a deeper suspicion lurks that she has undisclosed, perhaps unconscious, reasons of her own for continuing the friendship.

Typically, Chabrol isn't terribly interested in providing explicit explanations for the choices that his characters make, or the actions they carry out. Nor does he seem too concerned with the mechanics of suspense, preferring to conjure an omnipresent atmosphere of unease through subtle use of camera placement and a pared down script in which what remains unsaid hangs pregnantly over proceedings. The extensive use of locations in the Dordogne region provides a naturalistic feel, into which Audran and Yanne blend effortlessly. Each convincingly inhabits the bodies of these introverted characters whose amiable, worldly personae mask troubled interior lives that one can really only guess at. This obscurity is less frustrating than it is fascinating, however, because Chabrol is a master of pacing and mood, and he knows not only how to keep an audience gripped right to the end, but also how to haunt them afterwards.


Amongst the guests at a wedding are a Helene, a lonely teacher, played by Stephane Audran, and an ex-army butcher (Jean Yanne). Against their differences, the two develop a friendship. However, in the town there lurks a serial killer, and that killer may or may not be the butcher himself. Plagued with feelings of doubt and fear, Helene finds herself constantly at tenterhooks regarding her new friend (of sorts), and surprises and shocks are placed intricately until the very last frames.

At 90 minutes, this mystery feels longer than it is, and that may be due to some of the stylistic techniques adapted by director Chabrol, such as the languid and very sparse use of camera movement, and shots of the bells to contribute to a sense of time. Content-wise, he borrows from Hitchcock, using themes of shared secrets, obsession and moral ambiguity. These themes are used well, creating appropriate amounts of suspense and anticipation in the viewer, and Chabrol plays with his audience deftly, placing surprises and non-surprises in sequence so that we are every bit as nervy as Audran. He is less concerned with explaining the motives for the killings than just presenting them, and for that, and chilling atmosphere of indifference is created throughout the film.

The two leads are strong in their performances, and the slow, fragile romance between them is as credible as it is integral to the plot. In particular, Stephane Audran shines, as a woman who begins, poised, content and assured, only to finish ruffled and perhaps, as the ending shot shows, a little ruined by the events that she has witnessed. The film is carried along by an eerie, quasi-apocalyptic score by Pierre Janse and Domonique Zardi, which haunts long after the film has ended.

If the ending does feel like somewhat of a copout, that may because we as the audience have viewed one plot twist too many, and the frequency and slightness at which each twist is revealed diminishes its impact somewhat. But for the most part, this is good film-making; quite unpretentious, coolly aloof, and the subtle delivery only works to its advantage.

B+


Chabrol's triumph and also Stephane Audran's finest performance;only "le festin de Babette" will give her a part as strong as this one.She plays a luminous radiant beaming schoolteacher ,teaching her pupils spelling with a little help from Honore de Balzac and dance with "le menuet du Bourgeois Gentilhomme",a Molière-Lully collaboration.She epitomizes honesty,loyalty,innocence and devotion to her work.In direct contrast to her,we have Popaul,the butcher,masterfully played by Jean Yanne (He's never been as good as with Chabrol:please,please,do see "que la bête meure" (The beast must die)):He's obviously in love with Hélène /Audran but he realizes the gap between them.He's a crude uneducated brute,but his clumsiness is so touching you side with him.But we know from the start that won't be a happy story:the first scene,dealing with Cro-Magnon in dark caves heralds a story of blood and bestiality.Popaul is Cro-Magnon ,but he's also a victim of the war they waged with his blood.Chabrol 's camera insists on the war memorial,this inhuman piece of stone surrounded by four shells.LOOKS are more important than words between Popaul and Hélène,and as she begins to comprehend the horror of the situation,we know ,that in spite of what Popaul has done,she feels for him.Chabrol excels in depicting a small village ,French critics often compare him to an entomologist."Le boucher" remains his finest work to date.


If Chabrol has any claim to be the French Hitchcock then it is surely based on this, his best film. Starring his wife Stephane Audran it is set in a French village, which helps give a profound sense of isolation to the terrible events which take place there. As with all great thrillers the fear comes through the gradual realisation of what is really happening, rather than the continuous portrayal of graphically violent acts. The sense of evil in the film is palpable. Unmissable!


As others have noted, Chabrol is masterful in setting a tone of uneasy suspense. As the movie progresses, we gradually shift to the edge of our seat, figuratively at least. But is something else going on here as well?

******SPOILERS******

Roger Ebert's review prompted me to have another look at Helene as she appears at the hospital at the very end. He's right, there is something in her look there that is very different from concern or sadness; I'd say it is the look of triumph.

Helene, you will recall, once had a lover, but he left her a decade ago. She claims not to have formed any attachments since. If true, it appears she has never fully recovered from being discarded. Just as Popaul has been traumatized by his time in the army, she appears to have been permanently scarred by this event in her past.

Yet she clearly shows interest in Popaul...inviting him up to her flat to cook a leg of lamb he has brought her, asking him to go mushroom-hunting, giving him a birthday gift. So what gives?

As I read it, Helene's game is to attract men, get them to make an emotional investment, then dump them before she can be dumped--whether out of fear of being abandoned again herself, or as twisted revenge on men in general, or for some other reason. This would explain the triumph and satisfaction on her face at the hospital: Popaul has just given her the most abject confession of love, and even obsession, conceivable. She has (once again?) emerged victorious, unscathed. She has claimed a victim--perhaps another in a series. As such, she is no less a predator than he is, and for parallel reasons.

Perhaps all this is too cynical. Perhaps I'm reading too much into her behavior. But look closely at her expression as they wheel Popaul away on the gurney, and you'll have to admit that she is no cliched innocent victim (or near-victim). Something else is at work here.


For people who think movies like e.g. Independence Day are the best ever made, Le Boucher may seem like a slow and extremely boring movie. And it is slow but that is part of the movie's action. Though the movie has aged the movie's strengths and the thoughts put into the details of this movie make it work today too.

Le Boucher is amazing in it's use of symbolism. Few things are incidental in this movie. Colors, shades, shapes, sound, stories in this movie most often contain a message. (The colour red? The obelisk?).

Whereas the movie may work as suspension and entertainment the first time it takes at least another view to fully understand it and notice the main part of the details.


In the village of Tremolat, Périgord, the lonely headmistress Helene (Stéphane Audran) befriends the local butcher Popaul (Jean Yanne), who has a trauma of war, in the wedding party of her colleague Leon Hamel (Mario Beccara). In spite of their friendship, they do not become lovers since Helene is still recovering from the disillusion of her last relationship. In Popaul's birthday, Helene gives a lighter to him as a gift. During the excursion with her class to a cave in the woods, Helene finds the last victim of a serial killer that is stabbing young women in the area. She realizes that the woman is Leon's wife and she finds Popaul's lighter in the crime scene but she hides the evidence from the police. When Popaul visits her, she discovers that he still has the lighter and she feels relieved. However, when Popaul paints the ceiling of her house, she makes a discovery that affects her sense of security.

The unknown gem "Le Boucher" is a dark and intriguing love story where Claude Chabrol is certainly inspired in Alfred Hitchcock's style. The story is completely unusual and very simple, it is not tagged by an specific genre and can be resumed in the storyline; however, the screenplay, direction, performances and camera make the difference. The opening scene shows a beautiful area in the countryside of France where the plot takes place. Helene is a fascinating character with her contradictory and ambiguous behavior and relationship with Popaul. Their chemistry is also perfect. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): Not Applicable


Le Boucher is a lesson in suspense from French director Claude Chabrol. There is very little in the way of action in this film; but it doesn't matter, because the director knows how to handle suspense, and so despite the fact that there isn't much going on; the film is always interesting. In fact, many modern directors could benefit from watching this film. Through a detached atmosphere and an isolated French setting, Chabrol has created a movie seething with tension, and in a way that always allows the audience to fully take it in. The fact that the movie is beautifully photographed helps the film tremendously, as even if even less happened in the film - the visuals alone would elevate it above the norm. The plot follows the friendship between a local butcher and the school's headmistress, Helene. The pair grow to like each other in the midst of a local maniac mutilating girls in their village. As a birthday present, Helene presents her friend with a lighter; but things turn awry when the teacher discovers the latest victim...with the lighter she bought her friend at the scene of the crime.

Le Boucher stars Stéphane Audran in the lead role. This beautiful actress is superb at providing the lead, and also fits into the film brilliantly as she bodes well with the exquisite cinematography. The film is obviously a product of the time in which it was made, as the visuals are similar to a lot of other mystery films being released around the same time. The plot takes obvious influence from the Clouzot French classic 'Les Diaboliques', but this is not merely a rip-off - Le Boucher has a style all of it's own. Jean Yanne stars opposite Audran as the title character, and he too is excellent in his role. He creates just the right ambiguous atmosphere around his character, which ensures that the tension is instilled as it should be and the climax is believable. Le Boucher will no doubt annoy many due to the fact that not a lot happens, but unlike other films where nothing happens, such as The Blair Witch Project, there is always enough suspense here to ensure that the film doesn't become boring. On the whole, this is a great little thriller and comes with high recommendations.


When this film was made, despite the fact that Freud's theories were under attack, the film maker, Claude Chabrol, made a firm statement about what happens when a child's love for his mother is repressed by a father's hostility. In the opening sequence, a wedding, it is established, briefly, that Paul (the butcher)had a dark and unresolved relationship with his father, one that caused him to join the army and resulted in his having seen very little of his cherished mother. When the film begins, Paul and Helene meet and start a friendship that has promise of a relationship. But Helene's unwillingness to become Paul or anyone's lover, because of the pain she endured from a previous relationship, stifles a budding romance. Contrary to turning off Paul, this rejection seems to entice him. He can trust this woman because she is "logical," a word that turns up frequently when the two main characters describe how they run their lives. This "logic" though is not the one we commonly embrace, it is a logic of dark inevitability. Paul, whose father seemed to brutally punish him for his son's aggressiveness (and unconsciously for the boy's possessiveness of his mother), has adjusted to reality by living within the confines of a control in his life that prevents accidents or passions from taking place. He is, in effect, grateful that Helene is not giving him what he wants. Like his desire for his mother still lurks in his unconscious, his desire for Helene is always present - and because Helene has rejected him, like his mother had done, Helene has created a relationship as close to his mother as possible. It is very logical.

The thriller aspect of this film which is about a serial killer finds it's manifestations not in the easy, lurid horror techniques of too many thrillers but in the horror of what's going on within each of the characters - the horror of closeness, a closeness that each fear might kill them. The killings are merely an outward symbol for the internal murder that is going on within each character. The characters who, for years, had been killing themselves emotionally by their repressed desires reach, in this film, a dark emotional catharsis that makes them aware of how their repressed desires have ruined their lives.


is The Butcher a thriller? Yes. Is it a psychological drama? Yes. Is it an idyllic small town romance? Yes. Is it a horror film? Yes. Can all of these descriptions coexist? Yes. The Butcher is indeed all of those things. It's a film that deals with the greatest, most puzzling, and most disturbing mysteries of humanity, but it's also a small, simple film with a style so subtle it sometimes appears to be no style at all. Chabrol's French contemporaries are known for their flair- for their attention-grabbing camera work and editing. Hitchcock was known for his stylish set-pieces. But Chabrol has an amazing knack for convincing us that we're not watching a stylish film. The color scheme, the manipulation of light, and the stifling editing are as meticulous as in a Hitchcock film, or a Truffaut film, but are at the same time nearly invisible. His direction is heavily stylized but appears nearly accidental. Chabrol manages to transform picnics, schoolhouses and cobblestone streets into a landscape that is horrifying for its lack of apparent horror and for its incongruity with the horror being committed. The Butcher is also the story of two people who have adapted, in their own ways, to modern society. An uneducated, old-fashioned male war veteran adapts by becoming a killing machine, and an educated, stylish woman adapts by becoming a cold narcissist. Both were apparently functioning, normal human beings until they meet each other. But, when they meet each other, their neuroses come into the foreground: his animalistic passion and her ultra-civilized coolness nearly destroy each other. Some viewers say that the woman is the monster and some say it is the man. It is the man who commits truly monstrous acts, but it is the woman who, by way of her repressed attraction to such a monstrous man, sets his gears turning. The schoolteacher never could have foreseen the effect she would have on the butcher, but she is still responsible, and that is what is terrifying. The Butcher, however, is not a masterpiece because of its cynicism; it's a masterpiece because it manages to be cynical while having utmost respect for its characters. It's a great film because of the way it explores how hard its characters try and how pathetically they fail. It's a horror film about how impossible it can be for people to change.


"Le Boucher" (The Butcher) is a story of a young headmistress, Helene, at a school in a small village, who strikes up a relationship with the local butcher, Popaul, who seems to be quite a nice man. Helene has had a bad relationship in the past & is somewhat standoffish, and that makes for somewhat of an awkward relationship with her new friend.

There have been a lot of murders in and around this small village lately, and that's causing a big stir among the residents. A murder victim is found by Helene when she has her class on a field trip to some caves. Helene finds an object that seems to be the same one she'd given Popaul days before and immediately becomes quite suspicious of him.

This is rather a good thriller and perhaps similar in style to Hitchcock, only a bit nastier. The two leads are great & the tension and suspense are too. An excellent film and well worth seeing. 8 out of 10.


Le Boucher/The Butcher is one that falls into the love it or hate it camp. Certainly by modern standards, Claude Chabrol makes little of his premise  small town schoolteacher Stephane Audran falls for small town butcher and serial killer Jean Yanne  either as a suspense vehicle or moral drama. There are occasional hints of something deeper in the butcher's descriptions of the atrocities he saw in Algeria and IndoChina and which he has brought home with him to the idyllic backwater and scene of his unhappy childhood, but they're just left for the audience to make the connections. As usual, Chabrol is more interested in milieu than the crimes themselves, and his sense of place and community is impeccable without being forced, as his direction. One thing that is particularly striking is that he is able to use long, unshowy takes (some lasting several minutes) simply because his actors are up to the challenge, giving the film an unforced, natural flow. There's imagination and striking imagery when required  the film's most tense moment takes place during a fade to black, while a night time drive takes on a disembodied quality  but he's not out to batter his audience with technique. Quietly impressive, but you may need to have lived in a small town to get the most out of it.