The Great Train Robbery

The Great Train Robbery

Directed by Michael Crichton.  Written by Michael Crichton.  Stars Sean Connery, Lesley-Anne-Down, Donald Sutherland,   
1978, 110 minutes, Color, Rated PG. 

Michael Crichton had an interesting film career in the 1970's. His first job as director was the television movie PURSUIT (1972) which was based on his novel Binary (published under his 'John Lange' pen name).  PURSUIT is a perfectly fine little film but doesn't really point to any great talent. His first big-screen film was WESTWORLD (1973) based on his original screenplay, and was a corker of an idea executed far better than the meager budget allocated to it would have predicted.  Blessed with an above-average cast (especially the stunt casting of Yul Brynner as a robot), WESTWORLD shows some real flair for film storytelling.  Crichton moved on to other things after WESTWORLD, namely writing The Great Train Robbery (1975) and Eaters of the Dead (1976), but swung back to filmmaking when he accepted the directing and screenwriting chores for COMA (1978), which was based on the novel by Robin Cook. COMA is quite effective and fits in nicely within his oeuvre, even though it was not his original idea.  Along with PRIMARY EVIDENCE (1989), ROBBERY stands apart from Crichton's other films by not having any science fiction element to it. 

THE GREAT TRAIN ROBBERY (1978) is an old-fashioned adventure tale based on fact and blessed with sparkling performances by Sean Connery, Donald Sutherland and Lesley-Anne Down. The film is set in London of 1853 and does a good job of depicting this thanks to the opulent cinematography by Geoffrey Unsworth.  The bulk of the running time taken up with Connery's plan to plan and execute the world's first robbery on a moving train.   The robbery itself occurs over that last twenty-some minutes.  The plan involves copying four keys so that they can open safes on the train that contain gold bullion while it is moving.  In 1855, no one had ever successfully robbed a train in motion so it was a big deal at the time.  

Sean Connery plays Edward Pierce, mastermind of the plan.  The films shows the steps that led up to the robbery and the robbery itself.  The film compresses and slightly rearranges the events but remains faithful to the source novel  Those involved in the robbery were caught in 1857 and put on trial, but Pierce escaped and presumably lived out his life in luxury, as the money was never recovered.  As all of the pertinent facts for the story come from the trial transcripts, if they had not been caught we would have no real way of knowing how it had been done.  

Crichton states in the novel that he took all dialog from the trial.  The lends an aura of authenticity to the book, but also ultimately becomes its biggest problem in that almost nothing is known about Edward Pierce with certainty.  Given the lack of confirmable information that is available, it is not even entirely clear that this was his real name.  Therefore everything we know about him comes from what others said about him, and we know he lied to them.  Crichton largely overcomes this issue in the novel by layering in much detail of the time that the story is set.  It's a great read and very entertaining.  The film cannot spend so much time on the context of the events, but between Connery's charisma and the excellent production design the film moves along in a way that you aren't really aware of the lack of true understanding of Pierce.

Other changes from the novel and film:

• Two people are combined into the character that Sutherland plays.  He is a pickpocket and "screwsman" (someone who makes copies of keys) in the film, in the novel he is just the screwsman with another person being the pickpocket.  
• One of the keys has to be obtained from Mr. Henry Fowler, who in the film is a lecherous bank executive who carries one of the four keys needed to open the safes that contain the gold.  Pierce is able to copy the key by setting him up with a prostitute (played by his accomplice Lesley-Anne Down).  There is subterfuge involved and Down's character does not have to actually do anything with the man.  In the novel he is still lecherous, but suffering from the effects of a venerial disease.  Pierce sets him up with a prostitute who is a virgin (and frightfully young) and is able to copy the key while they are engaged in their activities.
• In the film, Pierce is caught at the station directly after the robbery.  He is put on trial and convicted but escapes as he is being led from the courthouse with the help of Down's and Sutherland's character.  In the novel everyone gets away.  However, two years later Sutherland's character is brought in by the police after a woman he knows tells them that he had a part in the gold robbery.  He eventually gives up Pierce and this is how everyone is caught.  Pierce still escapes, but Sutherland's character ends up in jail.

Just when things start to drag a bit too obviously--somewhere around the act of copying the fourth key--the film finally gets to the robbery itself.  Up until this point, the film was lightweight, agreeable and mostly fun, but the train sequence elevates the film and is far and away the most impressive thing that Crichton ever filmed.  Connery was just shy of 50 when he made this film, which makes his doing all of his own stunts on the train impressive.  The film shows him climbing onto the top of the moving train with no safety harness, and it's astonishing.  When Connery is almost taken out by low bridges several times it truly appears as though he was in real danger.  In his book Travels, Crichton explains that these scenes were carefully planned out which makes the execution all the more impressive, at least from a cinematic standpoint.

This is not to say that Connery was not in real danger at times.  Crichton also relates in Travels how the train was supposed to stay at 35 miles per hour, but as it was a period train there was no speedometer.  The enginemen estimated the speed the best they could by counting how many telephone poles they passed in a minute.  Later, the helicopter crew confirmed that for at least one of the sequences the train was in fact going closer to 55 miles per hour.  This gives the film an element of danger that it probably doesn't deserve.  Still, an agreeable film that has always been a personal favorite.

I watched it this time on the Kino Lorber Blu-Ray.  It's an older transfer but looks decent enough.  The disc includes the audio commentary by Crichton that was originally on the MGM/UA laser disc.  Crichton is an intelligent speaker and it's a great commentary.

Silent Madness 3-D

Silent Madness 3D

Directed by Simon Nuchtern.  Written by Bob Zimmerman & Bill Milling.  Additional Dialogue by Nelson DeMille.  Stars Belinda Montgomery, Viveca Lindfors, Solly Marx.  
1984, 93 minutes, Color, Rated R. 

Summary:
When a glitch in the computer system at an asylum for the criminally insane results in the release of the wrong patient - a giant-in-stature homicidal maniac named Howard Johns, who has a penchant for killing college coeds - it’s up to one of the institute’s top doctors to track him down. Unfortunately, it’s not just Howard she has to worry about, as the administration of the asylum has decided to cover up the error to avoid bad press, going as far as to hire a duo of thugs to permanently ’silence’ the good doctor. Soon enough, Howard finds his way back to the sorority house he once terrorized and sets out to murder the latest batch of nubile coeds who have taken up residence in the stately manor.

3D Rating:  **** out of *****

What makes a good 3-D film?  One could argue that the same rules that apply to 2-D films should apply to 3-D.  Good is good, right?  But that is not the case.  Any movie has the capacity to be better in 3-D.   I'm not talking novelty--I mean the very nature of it's dimensionality can enhance a dramatic work in unexpected ways. This is where "real" 3-D sets itself apart from "converted" 3-D.  Real meaning either two cameras or lenses captured the spatial information real-time on a set.  Converted meaning a 2-D image was processed to artificially create the two images used to make the 3-D image.

In a converted film, the visual effects technician has to manually determine what the dimensionality will entail, and how nuanced it will be.  This is not unlike what a cameraman using a 3-D rig would do on set, but the difference is every shot converted to 3-D costs money, and by and large only a certain amount of money will be spent on something as innocuous as someone walking down a corridor to get from point A to point B.  Certainly, some fine conversions are out there, but even in the best conversion there will be aspects that don't take full advantage of the third dimension.  And the reasons for that can be varied but it usually comes down to either money, or the filmmakers playing down the dimensional effects because they do not want "gimmicky" 3-D.

However, when you talk about a "real" 3-D film all of that depth and real world spatial orientation is just THERE.  True, the camera system used was adjusted to affect depth, but by and large when real 3-D is both filmed and presented correctly it's an amazing experience.  One of my film truisms is that a great presentation will always make marginal entertainment more watchable.  

Which brings us to SILENT MADNESS.

Now, this is not a great film.  I had never heard of this before seeing it for sale on Black Friday 2020, and only bought it largely due to it being released by Vinegar Syndrome and featured 3-D restoration work by the 3-D Film Archive. There would be a vigorous discussion trying to call it even a "good" film.  The acting is variable, and the story is pretty dumb, but even in 2-D it achieves some suspense and atmosphere.  

However, it is fabulous 3-D entertainment.    Truly, this is one of best 3D experiences I have had in many years.

3D disclaimer:  I have a LED TV that can display digital 3D.  My 3D reviews are based on how things look on my set. I am aware that other methods of displaying 3D may be different.

SILENT MADNESS was filmed in Arrivision 3-D, which was a single camera system that used a special lens to capture both right eye and left eye information on a single strip of 35mm.  Because only half of the 35mm frame was used, films shot in Arrivision 3-D are typically more grainy than not.  The director of photography was Gerald Feil, who had previously filmed FRIDAY THE 13th 3-D (1982).  Judging by the results on display in SILENT MADNESS he learned a few things from that experience.  

SILENT MADNESS does not have a great story.  According to the supplemental features on the disk, the film started as one kind of film but ultimately morphed into a slasher film.  As such, the film is a little clunky, characterizations are a bit thin, and the acting is a bit variable.  The film does tell a (generally) coherent story and generates suspense, so it satisfies as early 1980's horror film even without the third dimension.  

When viewed in 3-D, however, the film is an absolutely hoot.  Real care was taken to highlight the dimensionality of the different locations, and there are numerous "pop out" effects.  Additionally, the final chase sequence adopts a filmic style with colored gels that is quite different from what preceded it.  Think Mario Bava as opposed to FRIDAY THE 13TH and you get an idea of what I mean.

The Blu-Ray is taken from a release print, as apparently the original negative is missing.  The print used for this release is not great.  Many of the same faults found in the other Arrivision 3-D films JAWS 3-D and FRIDAY THE 13TH 3-D are also present here--alignment issues and a general all around softness.  These faults are largely baked into the print used, so while The 3-D Archive has done a remarkable job making it look as good as it does here, there was also only so much that could be done.

Also included on the disc is a "sizzle reel" which is in better condition than main feature.  This sizzle reel includes footage not in the final film and also presents a black and white flashback sequence in full color.  It's an interesting extra.  Colors are stronger as well, which seems to indicate that a scene in an experimental hospital wing was influenced by the body farm in COMA (1978).

Also notable is that there are two 3-D versions of the film included in the release.  There is the digital 3-D version of course, but there is also an anaglyph version as well.  I was not interested in this when I purchased it, but I have to admit that it works far better than I thought it would.  My experience with anaglyph 3-D was limited to broadcast "special events" when growing up, which typically did not work very well due to limitations inherent to NTSC.  However, the good folks at the 3-D Film Archive have come up with a proprietary process for anaglyph that works really well.  Watching it in anaglyph is a very viable alternative if you are not equipped for digital 3-D.  I've included some screenshot examples of anaglyph from the sizzle reel.  If you have the appropriate glasses, the 3-D should work well on your computer monitor.  

Vinegar Syndrome also includes at least one pair of anaglyph glasses in the package, as well as an embossed slip cover.

The Magnificent Ambersons

THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS

Directed by Orson Welles.  Written by Orson Welles.  Stars Tim Holt, Joseph Cotten, Dolores Costello, Anne Baxter, Agnes Moorehead, Ray Collins.  
1942, 88 minutes, Black And White, Not Rated. 

Where to start with this one?  

Rightly or wrongly, the original version of THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS stands as one of the great lost films in the history of Hollywood. This was Orson Welles' second film for RKO, after CITIZEN KANE.  The controversy generated by KANE did not translate into box office dollars, so when the first cut of AMBERSONS tested poorly, RKO instructed the film's editor to shorten it dramatically and reshoot some of the more extreme scenes to be more palatable.  Said editor was Robert Wise.  

Welles was out of the country while most of this went down, and it's intriguing to think what may have happened had he been in the country.  Evidence suggests that he was not opposed to making changes and memos exist where he suggests even more drastic restructuring than what ended up in the released film.  The story of why he was out of the country is an interesting story in itself--he was appointed a good will ambassador to Latin America by the Government and so started to make an anthology film of life in the lower America's.  Although jointly funded by the U.S. Government, RKO pulled the plug based on the footage being sent back, which was also most likely as an indication for how far Welles' star had fallen.

While most can acknowledge the innovations of CITIZEN KANE, even if they don't care for the film itself, it's not generally as understood that AMBERSONS was just as innovative in new and different ways than his previous film. The visual look of the film is what most people gravitate to, but there are other more subtle innovations that were lost due to the editing. Specifically, the original version of AMBERSONS featured multiple scenes of extremely long takes with intricate camera moves and/or subtle character interactions.  This is not to suggest that Welles was being theatrical in the way of stage plays, but rather theatrical in the film medium*.  The shot length for many of these scenes originally were far outside the shot length norms of 1940's Hollywood. The film is also much darker—literally and figuratively—than typical films of the era, with deep shadows that mirror the characters emotions. 

Then there are the sets. Going against convention, Welles had the Amberson manor constructed as a contiguous multi-story set. The detail lavished on the set was impressive (and expensive) and contributes enormously to the believability of the setting. It also allows for some highly expressive (“arty”) shots that use both depth and shadows to outstanding effect.

While Welles does not act on screen in AMBERSONS (the only time he was ever able to do that for one of his films) he contributes the narration. The first few minutes of AMBERSONS are an absolute joy to behold mainly due to his rich baritone voice.  It is also worth noting that the first half hour of the film is the least molested of what remains.  There are deletions, but nothing in the way of new scenes.

100% of the long takes mentioned above were compromised by the pre-release editing done to "improve" the film. The two biggest areas that were harmed were the ball sequence--a long single take that wound from one end of the set and back again, all while dialogue scenes and dancing took place. Welles claimed it was an entire reel of film, but even if it wasn’t it was still a tour de force. As most of the edits occurred after the halfway point of the story, much of the scene still exists in the film as it is relatively early in the story. Not so lucky was the original ending with Agnes Moorehead's emotional explosion chopped off before it really gets going.  Likewise cut in half was a kitchen scene where it is explained that some of the Amberson land had been sold because they needed the money.  In fact, just about all of scenes that illustrated how society was changing, for better or worse, and how it affected the family were lost in the re-editing.

I think that if the original 131 minutes version had been released in 1941, it would have died a death at the box office, so it's reasonable that RKO would have tried to "fix" the film. The question of whether the film was taken out of Welles' hands is more complicated.  Superficially, this became the first in many films that Welles lost control of.** Looking at it a little closer, however, it's an open question whether Welles was removed or whether he removed himself.  He left for South America to film his Latin American film before AMBERSONS was fully edited, and one has to wonder why he did that. Was he simply naïve, or was he aware that the film was problematic?  Perhaps he didn’t have the stomach for the compromise needed to appease the studio.  Sheer irresponsibility also cannot be discounted.

Based on what is known about the original version--the continuity script exists for that version--it was an artistic triumph but not an "easy" film.  The film is also aggressively "arty" and that may have also been a problem with audiences outside of the bigger cities.  This would have hurt its chances at the box office. The fact is, the film was flawed in having one of the most unlikable lead characters in film history. I happen to think that Tim Holt is fine in the role, and played it exactly as Welles wanted, but the character is a cad and it colors much of the story. The fact that the film's portrayal is a faithful rendering of the character from the Pulitzer Prize-winning novel does not really help things--what works in print sometimes just doesn't work on screen.  If Welles had played the lead, he may have been able to pull off making the lead character more likable.  This may have improved its chances at the box office. Maybe.  

That said, I also 100% believe that if the long version had been released it would be considered a filmmaking masterpiece, right alongside KANE.  It probably would have taken a generation for it to outlive its box office failure, but like it or not, art generally prevails.  

* On a side note, I personally have always viewed Mike Nichols' peak period (1966-1973-ish) to be "Wellsian" in nature as he approached things in a similar manner--long takes with a striking visual touch. 

**.  LADY FROM SHANGHAI (1948), MR ARKADIN (1955), TOUCH OF EVIL (1958).

The Nightmare Before Christmas 3D

Directed by Henry Selick.  Written by Caroline Thompson.  Story by Tim Burton.  Adaptation by Michael McDowell. Stars Danny Elfman, Catherine O'Hara, Chris Sarandon, William Hickey.  
1993, 86 minutes, Color, Rated PG.

Summary:
Bored with the same old scare-and-scream routine, Pumpkin King Jack Skellington longs to spread the joy of Christmas. But his merry mission puts Santa in jeopardy and creates a nightmare for good little boys and girls everywhere!.

3D Rating:  *** 1/2 out of *****

When THE NIGHTMARE BEFORE CHRISTMAS was released in 1993, Tim Burton was on a roll.   His first five films as a director were PEE WEE'S BIG ADVENTURE (1985), BATMAN (1989), EDWARD SCISSORHANDS (1990), BATMAN RETURNS (1992).  BATMAN (1982) was a huge hit, which no doubt enabled him to get NIGHTMARE BEFORE CHRISTMAS greenlit.  It was something of a dream project for him, and it took 3 years to accomplish all of the stop motion animation required to bring it to life.  This isn’t to say that Burton actively much worked on the film.  Director Henry Selick (JAMES AND THE GIANT PEACH) brought the film to life, overseeing all aspects of its creation.

It's a wonderful Halloween film*, full of witty visual jokes and real heart, perfectly realized by Director Henry Selick and his team of animators.  It was state of the art animation at the very tail end of the "traditional" visual effect era--JURASSIC park was ushering in the era of CGI at the same time.  The film contains an outstanding performance by Danny Elfman as Jack Skellington, and he also composed the songs and soundtrack.  The movie is great fun.  I had a CAV laserdisc set of this back in the day that I cherished.

3D disclaimer:  I have a LED TV that can display digital 3D.  My 3D reviews are based on how things look on my set. I am aware that other methods of displaying 3D may be different.

THE NIGHTMARE BEFORE CHRISTMAS was filmed in 2D and converted to 3D in post-production by ILM.  Needless to say, 3D was not a consideration during the making of the film, although the nature of how it was made--three dimensional animation--lends itself better than I expected to digital 3D.  

NIGHTMARE is full of crazy Expressionistic sets that lend themselves very well to 3D.   Additionally, the very nature of stop-motion animation takes the third dimension into account by its very design.  Pair that with the top notch conversion job and you end up with a very satisfying 3D experience.  All of the sets exhibit the type of dimensionality usually only found in true 3D films.  This means that every few moments there is something new to gawk at.  There are also some pop out effects that work much better than you would think.  This is an exceptional conversion that is faithful in spirit to the original production.  In this way it is like the Pixar conversions.

* This is not a Christmas film.

The Finest Hours 3D

Directed by Craig Gillespie.  Written by Scott Silver, Paul Tamasy & Eric Johnson.  Stars Chris Pine, Casey Affleck, Ben Foster, Eric Bana, Holliday Grainger.  
2016, 117 minutes, Color, Rated PG-13.

Summary:
In February of 1952, one of the worst storms to ever hit the East Coast struck New England, damaging an oil tanker off the coast of Cape Cod and literally ripping it in half. On a small lifeboat faced with frigid temperatures and 70-foot high waves, four members of the Coast Guard set out to rescue more than 30 stranded sailors trapped aboard the rapidly-sinking vessel.

3D Rating:  ** 1/2 out of *****

At first glance, this seems like an odd choice for a 3D film.  More than half of it takes place at night, in poor lighting conditions and with weather further obscuring things.   The film is based on a true story and was originally intended as a smaller budget film.  It grew considerably in both scope and budget during production and ended up as a big-budget special effects bonanza.  Whether it needed the big budget to tell this story is debatable--it probably didn't--but it ended up with over 1000 visual effects shots.  

The core story is compelling, and the storytelling is intelligent, efficient, and respectful.  This respectfulness also results in a curious downplaying of the danger inherent to the events depicted.  Kind of like how a date can be too respectful if you are in the mood for some action--sometimes you just want something more and if your date is unwilling you can mistake it for a lack of interest.  I do not think that the filmmakers were uninterested in their audience.  I think it more likely that the original small film idea got swamped by the visual effects needed to make it more of an action film. 

All this said I liked the film.  Now, on to the 3D.

3D disclaimer:  I have a LED TV that can display digital 3D.  My 3D reviews are based on how things look on my set. I am aware that other methods of displaying 3D may be different.

THE FINEST HOURS was filmed in 2D and converted to 3D in post-production.  According to the director the filmmakers planned for 3D while making the film.  This is not always the case, so this attention to framing coupled with the significant amount of CGI layers results in a fairly robust 3D environment.  It does not hold a candle to a real 3D film, of course, but the quality of the conversion is above average.  

There are very little in the way of "pop-out" effects in the film, but depth is truly outstanding, which helps sell the different environments.  There is one shot that involves a verbal message being relayed from the top deck of the ship down to the engine room that is a good encapsulation of the benefits of the 3D in this film.  As each crew member relays the message, we see another hallway, stairwell, or open room that subconsciously helps sell the illusion that these characters are on an actual ship.  It's an impressive shot, made even more impressive since they were not on an actual ship and the shot in question was pieced together from multiple shots on the soundstage as a visual effect.  Any scene with weather also works effectively in 3D, which is most of the film.   

I won't say that the 3D made this a dramatically different experience than the 2D version, but the 3D is effective enough that it will be my go-to format if I watch the film again.  As stated above, this was an odd choice for 3D but it turned out to be a reasonably rewarding 3D experience.  It was not released on physical media in 3D in the United States as Disney had abandoned 3D by 2016.