The Anderson Tapes

With many crime films, it all focuses on committing the perfect crime. It all relies on planning a plot so woven that the police wouldn't know what hit them. But what if someone knew of the supposedly elaborate scheme?

That is what Sidney Lumet's The Anderson Tapes explores. Following his release from prison, a criminal conspires to commit a massive robbery of his girlfriend's apartment building. But unbeknownst to him, there are mysterious agencies recording his every word. For what reason though?

This is one of the lesser entries among the work of Lumet and star Sean Connery though it is an amusing one. (The film was responsible for kickstarting Connery's career post-James Bond.) Another notable feat from this film? It introduced Hollywood to Christopher Walken.

The most notable sequence of The Anderson Tapes is the denouement. Interwoven with the actual crime and the aftermath of it, the sequence shows an agility that the would-be robbers in Lumet's (much) later work Before the Devil Knows You're Dead wish they had. (You thought I was going to say Dog Day Afternoon, weren't you?)

The Anderson Tapes is an all right film with some standout moments. It looks pale in comparison to Lumet's other films from the 1970s but again it has its moments. All in all, it's worth a look at least.

My Rating: ****

Running on Empty

The baby boomers had James Dean, the poster boy for teenage angst. Even decades after his untimely death, he still remains the pinnacle of adolescent misunderstanding. (Not bad for a guy with only three films to his name.)

A generation later, teenage angst had a new poster boy: River Phoenix. Like Dean, he portrayed the many troubles one faces as they grow up. (Just look at Stand by Me as an example.) And like Dean, Phoenix's life ended way too soon. (He met his fate by the way of an accidental multi-drug overdose.)

Phoenix's career wasn't for naught. He earned an Oscar nomination for his work in Sidney Lumet's Running on Empty. Interestingly, Phoenix's Danny Pope is similar to Dean's Jim Stark from Rebel Without a Cause. Both are the new kids in town, both quarrel with their parents (their father in particular) and both want acceptance.

Running on Empty doesn't rely solely on Phoenix's performance. (Although it is one of the main focal points.) The film also focuses on family dynamics (or, more accurately, the lack of them). The Popes aren't as dysfunctional as the Tyrones from Long Day's Journey into Night (another film of Lumet's), but the lack of communication within the Pope family makes them look like the Tyrones.

Running on Empty isn't one of the best Lumet films but it's one of the strongest if strictly for Phoenix's performance. There's also good work from Christine Lahti and Judd Hirsch. But again, this show belongs to Phoenix.

My Rating: ****

Fail-Safe

It has become somewhat expected for two films of a similar subject to be released the same year. In 2006, it was The Prestige and The Illusionist. In 1998, it was Saving Private Ryan and The Thin Red Line. Hell, it happens all the time.

It even happened back in 1964. Two films about the fear of impending  nuclear war were released. Both were made by prominent directors each with six films under their belts. The manner of how the subject was handled is where the similarities end. One is a comedy while the other is much more serious. If you didn't figure it out by now, the comedy is Stanley Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove.

But what's the other film, the one that went down the serious route? Well, that one is Sidney Lumet's Fail-Safe. (If you're wondering, Dr. Strangelove was released first.) Along with the way the subject of nuclear warfare is handled, the pacing of both films is different. Kubrick's film moves at a much more quicker pace than Lumet's film, which is sort of the main flaw of Fail-Safe. (It's not exactly the suspenseful pacing of 12 Angry Men.)

The cast is quite good, especially when you have the likes of Henry Fonda and Walter Matthau among it. (There's also good work from a young Larry Hagman, years before Dallas.) The claustrophobic cinematography by Gerald Hirschfeld is a very nice touch as well.

Fail-Safe is good though I wouldn't rank it among Lumet's top five best films. (Top ten, perhaps. Top fifteen, more likely.) The suspense doesn't particularly deliver, but the story is pretty good. All in all, it's worth a look. (Oh, and Dr. Strangelove is the better of the two.)

My Rating: ****

The Pawnbroker

With Sidney Lumet's death last year, we lost one of the undisputed great directors. Not many could make films like him. The most prominent aspect of his films was that he could always get great performances out of his actors.

One such example is Rod Steiger in The Pawnbroker. His character of Sol Nazerman is a square peg in the round hole that is 1960s New York City. He just doesn't fit in the fast pace of the city.

Sol tries to go on with his day without letting the regular flux of customers getting the better of him. The customers don't know of the life Sol led, so they just assume his behavior as unusual. In fact, he has to keep his composure to keep from falling apart.

One aspect of The Pawnbroker that stands out as much as Steiger's acting is Boris Kaufman's cinematography. Kaufman captures the hustle and bustle of both the city and Sol's mind. He also shoots the many gates in Sol's pawn shop as a way of rendering him a prisoner of his own life. Then again, what else do you expect from the same man who shot On the Waterfront?

The Pawnbroker is an underrated title of Lumet's filmography though it's not as great as 12 Angry Men or Network. It starts slow but gradually rises to a decent pace. It also loses something when Steiger's not on screen. Still, it's very much worth a look if you're a fan of Lumet.

My Rating: ****1/2

BOOK VS MOVIE: Equus

It's hard to read a play and see its film version. It generally only works if you've seen the play on Broadway, then see the movie. However, there are several directors who can make a production go from stage to screen with ease.

One of them is Sidney Lumet. His adaptations of Long Day's Journey into Night and Orpheus Descending (the movie was renamed The Fugitive Kind) both possess the original plays' flow, just as Eugene O'Neill and Tennessee Williams wanted.

Lumet's adaptation of Peter Shaffer's Equus is not only faithful to the play, it also stars Richard Burton and Peter Firth (both starred in stage productions of Equus). Both reprise their stage roles and they do it in a high caliber.

One notable difference between the play and the movie is that in the movie, Dysart is more self-loathing. He is unsatisfied with how his life panned out, his job has lost meaning, and his marriage is dead in the water. And Burton, a self-loathing figure himself, captures Dysart's frustrations perfectly.

Lumet's take on Shaffer's play is quite good, but it drags a bit halfway through. Fortunately, it picks up in time for the startling climax (which reminded me of the one in Suddenly, Last Summer).

What's worth checking out?: I'd go with the book.

Prince of the City

Sidney Lumet was a great director. He managed to churn out excellent performances from his actors (Paul Newman in The Verdict, Al Pacino in Dog Day Afternoon). Perhaps it was because Lumet himself was an actor knew how an actor's mind works.

In the case of Prince of the City, Lumet got a phenomenal performance out of Treat Williams, who plays narcotics detective Danny Ciello. We witness him falling to pieces before our eyes, watching him trying to figure out what's right in the world he lives in.

Lumet had previously covered police corruption eight years earlier with Serpico. (Interestingly enough, Al Pacino, the star of Serpico, was offered to be in Prince of the City.) Apparently Lumet made Prince of the City to get a more accurate depiction of the New York Police Department than what was shown in Serpico. And by my money I think he nailed it.

Lumet knew how to show the anatomy of a crime in his movies, as shown in 12 Angry Men and Before the Devil Knows You're Dead. Prince of the City may not get among the ranks of Network or 12 Angry Men, but it's an excellent movie, even if it's nearly three hours long (which, by the way, is my only complaint).

My Rating: ****1/2

BOOK VS MOVIE: Orpheus Descending/The Fugitive Kind

The most notable plays of Tennessee Williams are A Streetcar Named Desire, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof and The Glass Menagerie. Williams has written works not as well known as these plays, but some are well-written.

One of the plays in question is Orpheus Descending, which was adapted into a movie by Sidney Lumet under the title The Fugitive Kind. They're about a drifter arriving in a new town and rumors start to spread about him and a general store owner's wife.

Now Orpheus Descending isn't as great as Cat on a Hot Tin Roof or A Streetcar Named Desire, but it's pretty good. Although, some moments felt a little flat actually.

Marlon Brando and Anna Magnani, the two stars of The Fugitive Kind, were no strangers to Williams' work. After all, their big breaks as actors were thanks to Williams (Brando in A Streetcar Named Desire on stage, Magnani in The Rose Tattoo on screen).

I have to get something off my chest about Brando's work. There are tints of Stanley Kowalski in Brando's role of Val Xavier. One similarity between the two parts is that both men exude enough raw sexuality to make a woman weak in the knees, something Brando was quite skilled at back in the day.

The play wasn't great and neither was the movie. But I thought that The Fugitive Kind was better structured than Orpheus Descending. Can you really go wrong with Lumet to begin with?

What's worth checking out?: I'd go with the movie.

Before the Devil Knows You're Dead

I had grown curious on Sidney Lumet's most recent movie after hearing good things about it. And after reading Andrew's high praises, I became very compelled to watch it.

In dire need of money, Andy (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and Hank Hanson (Ethan Hawke) conspire to rob their parents' jewelry store. When the attempted robbery leaves their mother dead, their father Charles (Albert Finney) investigates the crime and uncovers shocking details.

As I was watching this, I kept thinking about an earlier Lumet movie, Dog Day Afternoon. The plots for both are almost similar: two men are behind robberies where the results go from bad to worse. The main difference is Before the Devil Knows You're Dead sucks you in (Dog Day Afternoon, however, takes its time). Hoffman and Hawke give great performances, as do Finney and Marisa Tomei. Just watching this made me wonder how Lumet doesn't have an Oscar yet.

My Rating: *****

Dog Day Afternoon

I've seen Sidney Lumet tackle different genres, from mystery (Murder on the Orient Express) to courtroom drama (12 Angry Men, The Verdict) to satire (Network). Now onto crime with Dog Day Afternoon.

Sonny Wortzik (Al Pacino) and Sal (John Cazale) have intentions on robbing a bank to get money for a sex-change operation for Sonny's lover Leon (Chris Sarandon). Unfortunately, the attempted robbery is a failure from the start.

Only Lumet can cram so much realism into one movie (yes, I know it's based on real events). Pacino is at the height of his career with Dog Day Afternoon and delivers one of his best roles. The interesting thing about the movie is that a majority of the dialogue is ad-libbed; the irony is the screenplay won an Oscar. Much like Lumet's earlier work Serpico, Dog Day Afternoon is gritty, real and edgy.

My Rating: *****

BOOK VS MOVIE: Long Day's Journey into Night

I saw a review describing Tennesse Williams as "the greatest U.S. playwright since Eugene O'Neill". Being the curious person that I am, I decided to check out a work of O'Neill's.

The story chronicles one day of the Tyrone family. The members of the family are James, a former actor; Mary, a lonely housewife; Jamie, a struggling actor; and Edmund, who always seems to be sick. Each family member has a secret: they're all addicts. James. Jamie and Edmund are all alcoholics, while Mary is hooked on morphine.

The character of Mary Tyrone reminded me of A Streetcar Named Desire's Blanche DuBois, since both are women who live in their own little world and are on the verge of having a breakdown. The fact that the play is autobiographical (O'Neill is portrayed as Edmund) gives it a more shocking feel.

The movie was good because it stays true to the play. But did it really need to be nearly three hours long? In a word, no.

What's worth checking out?: I'd go with the play.

Murder on the Orient Express

Personally, I'm not a huge fan of the mystery genre, particularly at the fact you know what happens when you re-watch it. But from time to time, I take an interest to it.


Unexpectedly returning to England from Istanbul, famed Belgian detective Hercule Poirot (Albert Finney) finds himself traveling on the Orient Express. One of the passengers, Mr. Ratchett (Richard Widmark), informs Poirot that he has been receiving anonymous threats and asks Poirot to act as his bodyguard. Poirot declines but when Ratchett is found the next morning stabbed to death, it is apparent that the threats he received were very real. Poirot soon deduces that Ratchett was in fact the infamous Cassetti, believed to be the man behind the kidnapping and murder of 3-year old Daisy Armstrong some 5 years previously. As he begins to question the dozen or so passengers on the train, he realizes that several of them have a connection to the Armstrong family and he begins to form a solution to a very complex crime.

There are several twists and turns, but not enough to fully grab my attention. I think Sidney Lumet tried too hard on this project. Finney delivers a good performance though.

My Rating: ****

Serpico

I like watching underrated movies from rolific directors (Billy Wilder's Stalag 17, Woody Allen's Manhattan Murder Mystery). An excellent example is Sidney Lumet's Serpico.


Frank Serpico (Al Pacino) is an undercover police officer who starts to grow suspicious of the honesty of his division. His investigation has him embarking into dangerous territory and his fellow officers turning on him.


Lumet definitely knows how to direct a thrilling movie (other examples include Dog Day Afternoon and 12 Angry Men). And Serpico is beyond thrilling. It's gritty. It's powerful. It's real. Pacino gives one of his best performances. He probaby would've won too.


My Rating: ****1/2

The Verdict

With today marking the one-year anniversary of his death, I thought it would be appropriate to review one of Paul Newman's movies.

Newman plays Frank Galvin, a washed-up alcoholic lawyer. His firm isn't doing so well; he has lost four cases in the last three years, and he stooped to ambulance chasing. His friend Mickey (Jack Warden) shows him a medical malpractice case involving a woman who's in a coma after a botched surgery. The original plan was to give the family a settlement outside of court, but after seeing the woman Galvin decides to take on the case.

Sidney Lumet, as I've mentioned before, is a very skilled director. Even though The Verdict came out 25 years after 12 Angry Men, Lumet clearly shows he still knows how to direct a courtroom drama.

Now mind you, I've only seen three movies with Paul Newman in them (Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, The Verdict and Road to Perdition), but Newman delivers one of the best performances of his career in The Verdict.

Suggestion: Watch this as a double feature with 12 Angry Men.

My Rating: ****1/2

Network

On the 12 Angry Men post, I said Sidney Lumet has directed numerous thrilling movies with Network being one of them. Network, among his other works, definitely stands out.

Newsanchor Howard Beale (Peter Finch) is being fired from TV station UBS from failing ratings. He announced on his show that on one of his upcoming shows he will shoot himself in the head, which results in high ratings and him getting fired early. His friend at the station Max Schumacher (William Holden) rehires Beale for an appropriate farewell and to apologize for his rant, but all Beale does is give a bigger rant. Producer Diane Christensen (Faye Dunaway) finds Beale's rants amusing since they bring in high ratings and convinces her boss Frank Hackett (Robert Duvall) to put Beale back on the air.

Peter Finch, by far, has given the world probably the most eccentric performances of the 20th century. Hey, if you don't believe me just watch his "mad as hell" speech (which you can watch here). Dunaway was also good in the movie and by that time she was overdue for an Oscar. Good thing she won for this. Holden was also good and also earned his Oscar nomination. The one performance that got an Oscar that suprised me was Beatrice Straight's role of Max's wife Louise. She only onscreen for about six minutes and the scene where she denounces him for having an affair with Diane very much explains her Oscar. And Paddy Chayefsky's outrageous screenplay also earned that Oscar.

My Rating: *****

12 Angry Men

Usually, when a director makes their debut, the movie either comes and goes in a blink of an eye or it leaves a lasting impression on those who see it. Sidney Lumet's 12 Angry Men definitely falls into the latter.

The movie opens in a courtroom where, after hearing the closing statements, the jury listening to the judge telling them their decision for the fate of a teenage boy accused of murdering his father must be unanimous. It then cuts to the jury room, where some of the jurors say they want to make the verdict quick so they can watch the baseball game. However, they don't get a quick verdict because one reluctant juror (played brilliantly by Henry Fonda) says that the boy is innocent. Slowly but surely, he explains how some of the factors heard in court are inaccurate. Despite this, Juror #3 (Lee J. Cobb) still thinks that the boy's guilty.

The movie generates a feeling of claustrophobia from the camera angles, which is a powerful part of the movie. The acting is also powerful, particularly from Fonda. Though, I'm still amazed that this is Sidney Lumet's directorial debut. He has made other powerful movies such as The Verdict, Dog Day Afternoon and Network, but 12 Angry Men is the best of the bunch.

My Rating: *****