Blu-ray / DVD
View From the Couch: The Manchurian Candidate, Super Mario Bros. Movie, etc.
View From The Couch is a weekly column that reviews what’s new on Blu-ray, 4K and DVD.
Laurence Harvey in The Manchurian Candidate (Photo: Kino & MGM)
By Matt Brunson
(View From The Couch is a weekly column that reviews what’s new on Blu-ray, 4K and DVD. Ratings are on a four-star scale.)
THE BRIDGES AT TOKO-RI (1955). While Samuel Fuller’s 1951 The Steel Helmet was the first Hollywood film about the Korean War and the 2022 Jonathan Majors starrer Devotion was the most recent, The Bridges at Toko-Ri can count itself among the most commercially successful. William Holden, yet to attempt to blow up the bridge on the river Kwai (that would come in 1957), here takes a crack at five such structures — he plays Harry Brubaker, a WWII vet, Naval Reservist, and civilian lawyer who’s incensed that he’s been called back to active duty to fly fighter jets during the Korean War. His upcoming assignment involves destroying the titular bridges, a dangerous mission he initially keeps hidden from his wife Nancy (Grace Kelly). Some of the speeches delivered by a well-meaning Rear Admiral (Fredric March) could stand to be less patronizing, and the comic relief offered by Mickey Rooney (as a quarrelsome flyer) and Robert Strauss (as a landing signal officer known as “Beer Barrel”) only interferes. But look closely and an antiwar message emerges — less jingoistic than many of the era’s WWII flicks, this one doesn’t shy away from taking a dour look at the pointlessness of the conflict. The excellent aerial and combat scenes earned this an Academy Award for Best Special Effects, with the film also picking up a nomination for Best Film Editing (beaten by an even bigger Holden hit that year, Picnic).
Blu-ray extras include audio commentary by author Steven Jay Rubin (Combat Films: American Realism, 1945-2010) and film historian Steve Mitchell, and the theatrical trailer.
Movie: ★★★
THE COVENANT (2023). The Covenant is also known under its official title Guy Ritchie’s The Covenant, although I suppose a more accurate moniker might be Guy Ritchie’s The Killing Fields. Like that magnificent 1984 feature, this one also centers on the relationship between an American in a war-torn foreign land and the local man who assists him. Unlike that earlier work, though, this one isn’t based on a true story, which means there’s more maneuverability to include an action-packed finale. Set toward the end of the War in Afghanistan, this centers on the relationship between Master Sergeant John Kinley (Jake Gyllenhaal) and his Afghan interpreter, Ahmed Abdullah (Dar Salim). More bullheaded and independent than the other interpreters, Ahmed tests Kinley’s patience on more than one occasion. Yet when the Taliban sets its sights on the pair, their shared loyalty and mutual respect are what lead them to take turns saving each other’s life. The second and superior of Ritchie’s two 2023 releases (the first was Operation Fortune: Ruse de Guerre), The Covenant often plays like a Peter Berg picture minus the simple-minded nationalism (e.g. The Kingdom) — while it generally steers clear of politics, it does acknowledge (via closing text and a few scene fragments) America’s failures when it comes to its Afghan allies. Above all, this is an action-laced drama, and it works just fine within these parameters, with Gyllenhaal and Salim both delivering excellent performances in between several intense set-pieces.
There are zero extras on the Blu-ray + DVD + Digital Code edition.
Movie: ★★★
INSIDIOUS (2011). While it’s long been time to call a moratorium on both haunted-house thrillers and creepy-child sagas, Insidious milks a bit of innovativeness from both these sub-genres before self-destructing. Patrick Wilson and Rose Byrne make a believable couple as Josh and Renai Lambert, who move into an old mansion with their three kids in tow. An accident in the attic leaves son Dalton (Ty Simpkins) in a comatose state; soon afterward, all sorts of supernatural shenanigans occur. The Lamberts pack up and move out, but when strange things start happening at their new abode, they realize it wasn’t the former house itself that was haunted. Rather than relying on gore, director James Wan and scripter Leigh Whannell manage to conjure some genuine tension by keeping characters and viewers off-kilter for much of the running time. But the film slips drastically with the introduction of two paranormal investigators (Angus Sampson and Whannell himself) whose unfunny comic relief (we’re not talking Bill Murray or Kate McKinnon here) disrupts the unsettling mood. Late arrival Lin Shaye is excellent as the two clods’ all-knowing boss, but her elaborate — and exceedingly daft — explanations regarding the otherworldly occurrences further deflate the project, and the frantic finale is simply overkill. And the less said about the awful last-minute twist, the better … although it did get the ball rolling on the sequels, including the upcoming Insidious: The Red Door.
Extras in the 4K UHD + Blu-ray + Digital Steelbook edition include a behind-the-scenes piece; an interview with Wan and Whannell; and a look at the film’s various spirits and demons.
Movie: ★★½
LOONEY TUNES COLLECTOR’S CHOICE: VOL. 1 (1945-1959). This collection of vintage toon tales doesn’t harbor many (if any) acknowledged classics, instead showcasing lesser known efforts (including some that have never been released on home video). Nevertheless, the Warner A-listers (Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, et al) are on hand, and there are enough buried treasures to make this an easy buy. Twelve of the 20 selections were directed by the usual suspects (Chuck Jones and Friz Freleng), but two were helmed by Frank Tashlin before he made the successful move from animator to feature-film writer (The Paleface, etc.) and then writer-director of such hits as The Girl Can’t Help It and The Glass Bottom Boat. Tashlin’s The Unruly Hare (1945) is a hilarious battle royale between Bugs Bunny and Elmer Fudd, while his Tale of Two Mice (also ’45) is an amusing cat-and-mice romp featuring Babbit & Catstello, rodents based on you-know-who. Speaking of puddy tats, another winner is Freleng’s Greedy for Tweety (1957), in which Tweety, Sylvester, and Hector the Bulldog all share the same hospital room while laid up with injured legs. Jones’ Beanstalk Bunny (1955) is a ferociously clever take-off on Jack and the Beanstalk, with Daffy Duck as Jack, Elmer Fudd as the giant, and Bugs Bunny as, well, Bugs Bunny. Freleng’s A Mouse Divided (1953) is a joy, as a drunken stork leaves a baby mouse with Sylvester, who grows attached to the little fella and must protect him from all the neighborhood cats. Others featured in various cartoons in this set include Porky Pig, the Road Runner and Wile E. Coyote, and Foghorn Leghorn.
There are no extras on the Blu-ray.
Collection: ★★★½
THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE (1962). John Frankenheimer’s Cold War gem may hail from 1962, but it’s frightening how it appears as if the movie has been ripped from the headlines of today: right-wing zealots who would corrupt the process in order to win the Oval Office; a populist political hack who often acts like a bratty child (“Run along; the grown-ups need to talk,” he’s told at one point); a conservative party that uses fear tactics to keep a nation on edge. Based on Richard Condon’s novel (with a script by George Axelrod), the film stars Frank Sinatra as a Korean War vet who, plagued by nightmares, begins to suspect that something’s not quite right with a former member (Laurence Harvey) of his platoon, a decorated hero who’s constantly having to contend with the political aspirations of his ruthless mother (Angela Lansbury) and her Senator husband (James Gregory). It’s heady stuff in a nail-biting chiller that still has the power to make viewers perspire profusely. Lansbury earned a Best Supporting Actress Oscar nomination for her portrayal of the monstrous mom, yet she’s matched by Harvey in a superb characterization as her aloof son, a tortured man whose humanity ironically only emerges once he’s turned into an unblinking political pawn. The 2004 remake (starring Denzel Washington, Meryl Streep, and Liev Schreiber) isn’t bad, but it’s no match for this gripping classic.
Extras in the 4K UHD + Blu-ray edition include audio commentary (from 1997) by Frankenheimer; a conversation between Sinatra, Frankenheimer, and Axelrod; an interview with Lansbury; and a pair of outtakes.
Movie: ★★★★
QUEEN CHRISTINA (1933). When the American Film Institute’s “100 Years” series ended the 20th century by picking the top 25 male and top 25 female stars from the golden age of cinema, Greta Garbo impressively landed in the #5 spot on the female side — only Katharine Hepburn, Bette Davis, Audrey Hepburn, and Ingrid Bergman ranked higher, with such superstars as Marilyn Monroe, Elizabeth Taylor, and Judy Garland actually placing underneath. So popular in her day that she was frequently billed on posters as simply “Garbo” (see also “Karloff” and “Chaplin”), she wowed audiences and peers alike (Gregory Peck once called her his favorite actress), but try to find anyone agreeing on which film houses her best performance. Anna Christie? Anna Karenina? Camille? Ninotchka? For my money, it would be her magnificent turn as the title character in Queen Christina, a satisfying (if dramatically shaky) biopic about the Swedish ruler who abdicated at the age of 27. Under the skilled direction of Rouben Mamoulian, Garbo (who herself was 27 when filming began) once again uses minimal movements to maximum effect, often allowing only her eyes to convey meaning and emotion. John Gilbert, her frequent leading man back in the silent period, co-stars as the Spanish ambassador who leads her to question her life as a bachelorette — he’s adequate, but this really is a one-woman show that just happens to include a cast of hundreds. That lengthy final close-up, as much an affirmation of the actress as of the character she plays, remains a classic snatch of cinema.
Blu-ray extras consist of a 1956 episode of the ABC series MGM Parade that focuses on Garbo’s career, and the theatrical trailer.
Movie: ★★★½
THE SUPER MARIO BROS. MOVIE (2023). Well, at least it’s better than that godawful live-action bomb from 1993, the one that featured a bewildered Dennis Hopper as King Koopa. And it’s certainly a must-see for present fans of the video game, for nostalgists with fond memories of endless playing, and for small children, three factions certain to award it four stars without hesitation. For most others, however, it’s an alarmingly flat endeavor that dutifully gets the job done and not much else. It’s basically Easter Eggs: The Movie, providing so much fan service and brand stamping that very little genuine wit or imagination makes it into the finished product — on that front, it pales next to the recent Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves and the Wreck-It Ralph duo. I absolutely loved the nihilistic Lumalee (voiced by Juliet Jelenic), and Seth Rogen, Jack Black, and Keegan-Michael Key manage to inject some personality into their interpretations of, respectively, Donkey Kong, Bowser, and Toad. But in the central roles of plumber siblings Mario and Luigi and Princess Peach, Chris Pratt, Charlie Day, and Anya Taylor-Joy are so colorless and bland that the filmmakers might as well have hired Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Marjorie Taylor Green just to see if they could have fared better. The visuals are colorful and occasionally clever — indeed, there are a handful of bright bits strewn throughout, but this ultimately registers as harmless and charmless.
Extras in the 4K UHD + Blu-ray + Digital Code edition include a making-of featurette; a piece on the cast members and their characters; and the lyric video for “Peaches.”
Movie: ★★
TIME BANDITS (1981). Given its year of release, this offbeat yarn stands as a gateway between the absurdist skits of Monty Python’s Flying Circus in the 1970s — no surprise, since it was written by Python members Terry Gilliam and Michael Palin and directed by Gilliam — and the string of off-kilter fantasy flicks that would dot the ’80s landscape (The Dark Crystal, The Neverending Story, Labyrinth, etc.). A box office hit that also managed to earn a reputation as a cult film, this finds a young boy named Kevin (Craig Warnock) joining a group of little people as they travel through time and become involved with such figures as Napoleon (Ian Holm), Agamemnon (Sean Connery), and Robin Hood (John Cleese, another Python alumnus). All the while, they’re being pursued by the Supreme Being (Ralph Richardson), who’s seeking to recover the magical map they stole, and the Evil Genius (David Warner), who’s hoping to claim said map for himself. Gilliam’s films tend to be either awe-inspiring or overbearing, and this one manages to dip into both columns, with some brilliant bouts of fancy occasionally undermined by inane overkill. Incidentally, this was one of the first films produced by George Harrison’s HandMade Films, which had initially been created to finance 1979’s Monty Python’s Life of Brian and later backed other successes like Mona Lisa and Withnail and I.
Extras in the 4K UHD + Blu-ray edition include audio commentary by Gilliam, Palin, Cleese, Warner, and Warnock; a conversation with Gilliam; an appearance by Shelley Duvall (who has a supporting role in the film) on a 1981 episode of the late-night talk show Tomorrow Coast to Coast with Tom Snyder; and a gallery of behind-the-scenes photos.
Movie: ★★½
UP IN SMOKE (1978). My, how the times do change. In 1936, Reefer Madness showed how just one puff from a single marijuana cigarette could lead to murder, suicide, insanity, and — gasp! — overly exuberant piano-playing. In 1978, Up In Smoke showed how smoking a joint the size of a football could at worst lead to a severe case of the munchies. In short, Nancy Reagan wouldn’t have found much use for this cult hit in her “Just Say No” campaign, as Cheech Marin and Thomas Chong (making their film debuts after successful stand-up and recording careers) prove to be irresistible anti-establishment figures in this consistently amusing dum-dum comedy. With a script as aimless as its protagonists, Up In Smoke (billed in theaters with the great tagline, “You’ll be rolling in the aisles!”) drifts from one comic vignette to another, as stoners Pedro (Cheech) and Man (Chong) are constantly on the prowl for their next high. Their odyssey leads them to the home of Pedro’s Vietnam-scarred cousin Strawberry (Tom Skerritt), to Mexico to pick up a van made entirely out of weed, and to a rock club to perform in a “Battle of the Bands”-style contest. Up In Smoke is sloppy, crude, and decidedly non-PC, but just try not to laugh when a coked-out partygoer unwittingly snorts a few lines of Ajax (“Good shit!” she declares), or when a police dog is glimpsed after its encounter with the marijuana-van, or when Pedro explains that his undocumented relatives purposely called Immigration so they could get a free ride across the border into Mexico to attend a wedding.
Blu-ray extras include audio commentary by Cheech and director-producer Lou Adler; a retrospective piece; and deleted scenes.
Movie: ★★★
FROM SCREEN TO STREAM
RAMPART (2011). Dave Brown, the corrupt cop at the center of Rampart, is described by one of his own daughters as “a dinosaur … a classic racist, a bigot, a sexist, a womanizer, a chauvinist, a misanthrope, homophobic clearly.” Why stop there? He’s also a bully, a thief, a murderer — and one of the most compelling cops seen on screen in some time. Dave Brown is played by Woody Harrelson, who earned a well-deserved Oscar nomination for his supporting stint in writer-director Oren Moverman’s 2009 drama The Messenger. Whereas that film found Harrelson playing a decent man grimly doing a dirty job — an army captain tasked with informing families of the deaths of their loved ones who were off fighting for God and country — this Moverman movie finds him cast as an indecent man happily tackling a dirty job: serving as a “soldier” (his word) in an effort to cleanse the Los Angeles “jungle” (ditto). With a real-life 1999 LA police scandal serving as the backdrop, Rampart follows Dave as his life begins a downward spiral. Caught on camera savagely beating a civilian and later involved in a highly questionable shooting that leaves a Hispanic man dead, Dave becomes the poster child for everything that’s wrong with the police force. With a supporting cast that includes Sigourney Weaver, Steve Buscemi, and Ice Cube, and a rare screenplay from L.A. Confidential novelist James Ellroy that he co-wrote with Moverman, Rampart is more of a character study than any sort of crime procedural, and it’s all the better for it.
Movie: ★★★
========================================
Review links for movies referenced in this column (all links open in new window):
Abbott & Costello
The Bridge on the River Kwai
Camille
Devotion
Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves
Ghostbusters (2016)
The Girl Can’t Help It
The Glass Bottom Boat
The Killing Fields
The Kingdom
Mona Lisa
Operation Fortune: Ruse de Guerre
The Paleface
Ralph Breaks the Internet
Discover more from FILM FRENZY
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Let me preface by saying that I think that you are one of the best film critics writing today. Your depth of knowledge and breadth of appreciation, both in decades and genres covered, are massively appreciated. My personal watch-list has grown tremendously by following your “From the couch” posts.
But “politics.”
It’s one thing to talk about how politics inform decisions about which movies are made, how those films are perceived (then and now), and how these politics reverberate through the story-telling (for good or bad).
But no one cares about YOUR politics. It’s clear that you think your political positions are just, humane and unimpeachable. Good for you. But harping on these debatable positions, in an otherwise cogent critique, is obnoxious, condescending and pedantic.
Politics in the modern era is poisonous. Party, candidate, platform makes no difference in the lives of the vast majority of Americans. Nothing ever changes for them, except that things look more hopeless every year.
Real Clear Politics has been tracking “direction of the country” surveys since January 2009. In that time, 2,884 surveys have been conducted across a variety of polling organizations. During this 14 year period the average percentage of Americans who believe that the country is moving in the wrong direction is 61%. Only 22 polls have shown Americans feeling positive about the direction of the country. Of those, only 8 polls have shown positive feelings above 5%.
All that to say, for most Americans, you could have just as easily said:
…ripped from the headlines of today: left-wing zealots who would corrupt the process in order to win the Oval Office (Zuckerbucks); a corrupt career political hack who often acts like he has lost his mind completely to Alzheimer’s (“We have plans to build a railroad from the Pacific all the way across the Indian Ocean.” To pick one quote at random); a liberal party that uses fear tactics, decisiveness and corporate media stooges to keep a nation on edge.
If you had, MORE people likely would have agreed with you. Although they (and you) would be dismissed as conspiracy theorists, and you would be demonetized by the elites.
On a happier note, this has to be my favorite “I can insert politics anywhere!” quote.
“After a deadly disease wipes out much of the planet (presumably, the imbecilic anti-maskers were the first to go)…” The Last Man on Earth (1964)
Well, keep up the good work.
Hi, Ignatz; thanks for writing. And thanks for the very kind words; plus, it’s always nice to hear from someone else who appreciates all manner of movies.
Now, “politics.”
Before Film Frenzy, I spent the entirety of my decades-long career as the film editor / critic at an alternative newsweekly. I don’t know how familiar you are with the alternative press — current and former weeklies and websites like the Village Voice, the Boston Phoenix, the Stranger, Slant, etc. — but it is expected and encouraged (heck, maybe even required by some) that their critics bring real-world politics, history, issues, controversies, etc., into their arts coverage (not just movies but literature, theater, music, etc.). Yes, it’s a more irreverent and often inflammatory brand of criticism than what’s offered in mainstream media (although Roger Ebert was notorious for injecting leftist politics into some of his reviews, and he won a Pulitzer), but it’s what’s in my blood.
And movies don’t exist in a vacuum, instead reflecting the world around them, even if their sociopolitical slants are usually unintentional. A romantic comedy where the heroine’s best friend is a gay guy probably isn’t trying to be political, but just that inclusion makes it so (after all, do you think those GOP monsters passing / supporting all those grotesque anti-LGBTQ laws would include such a sympathetic homosexual character if they made a movie?). And if movies don’t exist in a vacuum, then neither can coverage / criticism of such be expected to do so. Kyle Smith (to name one) gives me a headache with his political digs at liberals in his film reviews, but that’s his right and I wouldn’t want him to change.
At any rate, from a political standpoint, there’s no critic as obnoxious and foaming-at-the-mouth (not even me!) as one on the right: Armond White, who compounds it by having often terrible taste (who could forget that week in Summer 2010 when he mercilessly trashed TOY STORY 3 while raving profusely about JONAH HEX? Yikes!).
Cheers!
Hey, thanks for the thoughtful reply. I must confess I was unsure that you would reply. I am used to writers and publications on the left simply shutting down conversations, rather than engaging with someone who veers, even slightly, from the formally accepted narrative. So, thank you.
I grew up in LA during the 70s and 80s and witnessed all that was on offer until I moved, shortly after the turning of the new century. I spent years reading the LA Reader and LA Weekly. As a huge repertoire film and small venue music fan, they were required reading. I even worked for the LA Weekly for a few years as a courier/messenger, shuttling print ads to and from advertisers. I met a lot of great people. I also met Harlan Ellison (what a piece of work, good writer though). Good times. I was born very liberal, but in recent years I’ve found that the left has become extremely illiberal. Also, as I have grown, I have learned that not all the values of the right are completely suspect. I might have also been influenced by witnessing the brutal fall of Portland, Oregon.
I had hoped to make that distinction in my comments. Politics and culture infuse all works that proport to examine the human experience. What I was trying to call out was the gratuitous point scoring against political “boogie men” (anti-vaxxers, mask refuseniks, MAGA Americans). It seems that despite the elite left’s love of all things “non-binary” they are absolutely Catholic in their approach to politics. Even if you acknowledge the miraculous boon from vaccines for small pox, measles, mumps, etc. Even if you share that you, and your children are fully vaccinated against these scourges. The moment that you confess serious doubts about the covid “jabs” (they are not vaccines and I refuse to call them that) you are branded a backwards, science denying, troglodyte. Same thing if you say, “you know, it appears that all the REAL scientific research suggests that wearing masks AT BEST makes no difference, and at worst poses serious heath risks”. Same thing if you say, I am all about equal rights for enthusiasts of all manner of human coupling but perhaps we should not race to irreversibly mutilate children who may just be experiencing the pangs and confusion of, well, being children. No, just by saying that, I, and people like me are declared irredeemably evil, and the only right and good thing is to shut us down. That’s the feeling I get when you parenthetically take me down for a difference of opinion in a Richard Matheson/Vincent Price review. Is that really “politics”?
Nuance, packages left half-wrapped, sentences that trail off, a vague sense of moral ambiguity, these are things of effective story-telling. They can be richer still if the themes of Politics, human politics, is worked into them. What they do not need is pure partisan politics. That’s just propaganda, dogma.
Oh, and I completely agree with you about Armond White. I am not convinced that he even likes movies. I am even less convinced that he is a writer of any quality.
Thanks again. Looking forward to the next view from the couch.
If a critic uses their platform to issue political screeds with movies as a mere launch pad for their agendas, I’d be sure to avoid that critic. But to me a well-written, well-reasoned review/analysis isn’t spoiled by a few pointed political pokes, of any stripe. For the record I’ve always loved reading Armond White’s pieces, back to his NY Press days, though he and I exist on near opposite ideological poles.
Agreed! That’s why I continue to read ( with the occasional eye roll).
I can’t imagine a review of Michael Moore’s movies, or Dinesh DiSouza’s, that didn’t focus largely on their makers’ politics. That’s the entire point of their films. Of course any good critic is also going to focus on whether those movies work effectively as the agitprop they were clearly intended to be. And a really astute review would try to zero in on whether their creators were bending the truth (or, in the case of DiSouza, waterboarding it to death).
But even criticism of mindless escapist flicks destined for the summer multiplex could maybe do with *more* politics rather than less. I was struck by author David Sirota’s take on the original “Ghostbusters” as largely buying into the Reaganite hatred of government, with government employees portrayed as officious bureaucrats who are trying to lord their power over the heroic entrepreneurs. Granted, this was a lightweight comedy that was likely not intended to advance any particular partisan agenda. But it seems odd for critics not to interrogate the movie’s taken-for-granted assumption that public servants are by definition the bad guy.
Personally, I think criticism is fair game for a personal point of view.
Most works of art and/or culture are a product of politics… either conscious or unconscious. It is a political statement in itself to not comment on politics, or to avoid it as being “inappropriate” in a certain situation… or to comment that someone is being too political in their writing. Politics is avoidable… but at our peril.