Reviews

Unseen from 1975 until 2003, this is an unsettling, confusing, scattershot rollercoaster of a ride through someone's paranoia, psychosis, mental collapse and, ultimately, exposure as a fraud. But the journey to get there is one of great intensity, superlative acting, highly-focused writing, and worthy execution by a small ensemble cast.

Schell's performance is worthy of his Oscar nomination, and his character is relentlessly maniacal, offbeat, fragile, dangerous ... and that is what makes his Arthur Goldman so intriguing.

There is little to relate to in Goldman's personality as he is so 'off the wall', unpredictable - switching between reason and paranoia in an instant. The most relatable character is Lawrence Pressman's Charlie - he doesn't really understand very much at all about his employer, but he does what he is told (you would at $800 a week, especially in 1975), and Charlie certainly gains the viewer's sympathy as he is manipulated and (once) even violently abused by Goldman.

Lois Nettleton, as the interrogator Miriam Rosen, fares no better in trying to get into Goldman's psyche, as Goldman repeatedly catches her off guard.

Is some senses, the film is as confusing as Goldman's character, and that may well be a deliberate ploy of director Arthur Hiller - the whole two hours' running time may well be deliberately unsettling - hence the need (IMHO) to watch this more than once to catch all the nuances and sudden changes in Goldman's personality.

The 'pay off' does come as a surprise rather than a shock, but when you piece together the reasons why Goldman assumed someone else's identity, you can tangibly sense the guilt and shame he felt at surviving WWII, instead of joining the 6 million Jews that didn't.

This is a rewarding movie if you stick with it. Despite a slow first half, in which you have to piece together characters and background plot yourself, the atmosphere builds in intensity through the trial and shock confession at the end.

Not an easy ride, and not enjoyable in the sense that would come out of a movie theatre saying 'wow, that was great'. My first reaction, if I had seen this at a cinema, would have been 'phew, that was hard work, but the hard work was worth it.'

Going into a movie knowing what to expect can be a comfort blanket. There is no such comfort in 'The Father'.

Anthony Hopkins is the subject of the title - a seemingly very alert and active 80-something. But as the film progresses, it is obvious he is being gripped by something that is out of his control, and will ravage his brain and his thought processes.

If we are looking at this from the outside, then it's possible to but a mental barrier in between us, and what we are seeing. But with The Father, that barrier is taken away, and the viewer is immersed in Hopkin's suffering and confusion.

Reality is not really reality at all - things change colour, move, timelines are distorted, his relatives change appearance, and as much as we try, we can't avoid asking ourselves asking the same questions that Hopkin's character is asking himself: 'What day is it?', 'Where's my watch', 'Who is this person?'

That is the genuis behind The Father - we cannot avoid asking the same questions - I thought that door was a different colour - I don't remember the layout of that room - wasn't the view from the window different last time?

Acting honours are shared between the small ensemble cast, and the sense of reality (or not) is particularly strong.

The last scene is particularly heartbreaking, and is very emotional.

Definitely a keeper, but you would really only want to watch it again with someone who hasn't seen it, just to see how they react.

Hackman and Brown had already teamed up in 'The Split' - and again hooked up in this prison picture - both were made in 1968.

Is 'Riot' an escape movie? There is an escape attempt but that doesn't seem to be the main plot point - it almost feels tacked on to the rest of the plot. The main crux of the movie is to try and convince the prison officers that there has been a riot in the isolation section of the prison, and to use as a ruse to cover up the escape plan.

There are some good vignettes during the 1 hour 36 minute run time, but it doesn't really add up to a coherent whole. Despite Hackman's impending star status, Jim Brown takes centre stage, and his part is written better, and not quite as one-dimensional as Hackman's 'Red'.

In fact, Mike Kellin comes out better than Hackman with his better-rounded Bugsy.

All in all, Riot smacks of a double-bill programmer, a late-night TV staple of the 70's and 80's. It's not a bad film, but could have been better, if it had not done the 'explotation by numbers' bit in some of the scenes. The gore seems tacked-on and probably had shock value in 1969, but not now, and the 'Queens' scene was unnecessary - implication is always far stronger than exploitation.

So, Riot is a bit of a curate's egg. Good in parts, cheap shots in others. For Hackman it was a stepping stone to better things, for Brown it was another notch in his 'action hero' bedpost, which began with The Dirty Dozen.

Watchable, but ultimately dissapointing.

MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS I remember seeing this on video in the mid-late 80s - and still can't get a Region 2 DVD of this one, so make do with a VHS copy made many years ago.

Based on James Kirkwood's novel, Pryor does his typical (sometimes foul mouthed) routines as a POW returning to find his life has fallen apart. The early dramatic scenes have quite an impact, actually more so than the comedic scenes.

Pryor tries hard with the material and there are some genuinely funny moments (the signing of the confession is one).

Ronny Cox offers sturdy support and Margot Kidder plays the 'tart with a heart' who eventually drives off into the sunset with Pryor and $100,000 to boot!

I've always had a soft spot for this movie, and was unjustly ignored at the box office. Pryor's screen presence carries this one, but this is still no way a turkey.

MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS Sandwiched in between two big hits, 'Bullitt' and 'The Thomas Crown Affair' and the labours of love that followed - 'Le Mans' and 'On Any Sunday' - this is one of Steve McQueen's supposedly lesser efforts.

It is classed as lesser because a) it is not as popular as most of his movies b) It isn't seen that often.

However, this is a lovely, life-affirming coming of age movie. Mitch Vogel is perfect in the role of the innocent 12 year old boy taken on a journey of self discovery by his best friend Boon, expertly played by McQueen. Rupert Crosse was Oscar nominated for his role.

The best scene in the film is the climactic horse race, expertly photographed and full and excitement and tension. However my favourite scene is where Boon affirms his respect and admiration for his 12 year old charge, rather than vice versa.

Unfortunately this movie has been relegated to an afternoon filler on TV, and really deserves better.