torgulsmith-225-355486 Reviews

Charley Varrick (1973)

What was left on the cutting room floor.

[8/10 · 23 February 2024]

My thoughts on what I believe may have been the original story line.

Charley knew all along the mafia money was in the bank. He took a four person crew to rob a bank he expected to have a couple thousand dollars at most? $1300 according to the sheriff. Split four ways? Even with inflation, that's peanuts.

First off, there's the secretary. Why was she a character at all? As is she serves no purpose. In her first scene, she gives a sort of scoffing smirk to her boss, 70's code for "just had office sex" I'm guessing. We know the original script had more sex. Then Charley flies all the way to Reno, buys her $20 of flowers, visits her in her plush apartment, and spends the night with her. They seem pretty familiar. Charley does nothing else in Reno, as I remember. So she's his source for the info, and he's there to give her a cut.

Then there's the branch manager, who takes Charley to the vault with the mob money, not the more or less empty one. He's clearly played as ill, probably terminally ill. He has a ranch, he loves his town, does he have a family? Did he make a deal with Charley for a cut, for his family? Shoots himself before he can be tortured, or have his family threatened.

Charley gets two big bags from the vault. Clearly, it's a dump, right? Individual deposits aren't in big bags. Charley knows, but the sidekick is too dumb. Charley pretends to be surprised, and keeps him supplied with booze.

Charley has had the whole gang go to the dentist, to leave dental records. He switches his with the surviving guy. Probably plans to kill him. Blow him up in the trailer? He buys explosives. Which he then later uses, adapting to circumstances, to kill Buford Pusser.

So, maybe that's the plot, if you read between the lines, and the more obvious story that made it to the screen, where Matthau, beloved film good guy, isn't so obviously a cold blooded killer? The changes made either in the script, or in the edit? Did the studio intervene?

Maybe I'm being Captain Obvious here, but I've yet to read a synopsis that asks these questions.

Vikings: Valhalla (2022– )

Vikings Valhalla serves up a Viking ish smorgasbord of bloody fun

[6/10 · 28 February 2022]

The usual enjoyable, ahistorical Viking romp from the crew. Lots of sexy people, swords, blood, ships, scheming, screaming, post apocalyptic road warrior armor, dubious imaginings of Norse rituals, etc. They've dropped the ridiculous pseudo Scandinavian "accent" for the most part, thank Odin, replacing with a vaguely "Eastern European" one, sorta like a Bond villain, which is less cringe inducing.

Just a note for all the folks complaining about "wokeness" and POCs...if that's what's got yer panties in a wad, and not the disregard for the actual history, the historical characters who were not contemporaries, the ridiculously WRONG armor, costumes, etc, then I think we know what your actual objections are. To clarify, if you are upset about the "inauthenticity" of black female jarls, or female Viking warriors, because of your "knowledge" about historical authenticity, but you are not equally upset by the fantasy armor, the fact that Harald Sigurdsson was only 2 years old at the time, or the horrifyingly bad Saxon costuming, then it's not "inauthenticity" you are mad about.

The Scorpion King: Book of Souls (2018 Video)

Give the guy the next try at Conan

[29 October 2018]

So this afternoon the recent abominable reboot of Conan the Barbarian was on broadcast tv, so, against my better judgement, I watched some of it. Every bit as terrible as I remembered. I love the Milius Conan, of course, even though it's about different guy named Conan, apparently. So I ran across this thing on Netflix, and I thought can't be worse that what I just saw, so why not? And what a pleasant surprise! A perfectly serviceable sword&sandals&sorcery film! Obvious these people love the Schwartz Conan, several sly references. Handsome production, good art direction, far better than the recent Conan, better fight choreography. In fact, pretty much a Conan adventure, with a different lead.

The Expanse (2015–2022)

Downbelow Station

[12 February 2018]

So this is a fantastically good show. The real physics of space travel, no warp speed, transporters, or artificial gravity. The sci fi show I've been waiting for. I haven't read the books yet, but I will. However, does anyone else see a remarkable similarity between the scenario of Expanse and "Downbelow Station" by CJ Cherryh, and all of her Merchanter/Union novels? It's pretty much the same, but on a solar system scale, rather than an interstellar scale. A decadent, declining earth, striving to maintain control. A militaristic Independant former colony seeking to seize control. An alliance of stationers, belters and merchantshippers. The Martians and Cherryh's Unioners are similarly fanatical, technologically in advance of earth. Stationers have adapted to a life entirely in space, much like belters. Etc. Technology, with the exception of Cherryh's "jump drive" is the same. Spin or acceleration for gravity. The "Nauvoo" actually looks exactly like the ships described in the merchanter novels. This season we are dealing with refugees evacuated from bases destroyed in the earth/mars conflict. That's pretty much what most of "Downbelow Station" is about. Expanse adds the alien protomolecule, but otherwise, this could easily be the same fictional universe, but several hundred years earlier. If you haven't, I recommend "Downbelow Station" and her other early sci-fi. In particular Faded Sun trilogy(a downer) and Pride of Chanur for lite fun. Many have told me her writing style is an acquired taste, so, there ya go.

Hannibal Brooks (1969)

Beautiful and humanistic film, but...

[7/10 · 27 May 2017]

Wonderful film, very much about the sane man confronting the insanity of war. Beautiful photography in the palette of the 60's ww2 films, rich greens, browns, blues. A film about travel, meeting different characters, each representing different aspects of human nature. Reed is completely out of character, yet completely convincing. However. However. What is up with the polish girl, who is a totally sympathetic character, machine gunned, at the end? And Brooks, etc all, blithely crossing the Swiss border, without a moments reflection on the beautiful corpse they left behind? Why could not the screenwriter allowed her to live, explain the practical necessity of her betrayal, and stay with brooks?

Battle of Britain (1969)

Fantastic childhood favorite. And funny bits

[10/10 · 5 May 2017]

So everyone else's comments, yes. But how about the funny bits? "Repeat please?" "Private polish chit chat", and "thanks awfully, old man", oh, and "get your hands up you Nazi bastard"

Then there's the special effects. Obviously there's the explosions apparently achieved by scratching the negative. And of course the fishing line on the Stuka crashing into the chain home station. But my two favorites are the attack on the French airfield and the he 111 with the dangling string. In the airfield sequence, there's a strafing sequence when one Me comes straight at the camera, hurricane explodes, another me goes right to left, but the charges meant to show staging fire are reversed, so as the approaching me fires, the crossing charges fire, and so on.

Then there's the he 111 with the tether. So they got a great shot of the large scale model 111 plunging into the channel, but the tether is still attached to the model for some reason? So they add in a shot of "control cables" snapping, to explain!

The Last Kingdom (2015– )

Fun with some bad art direction

[5/10 · 10 April 2017]

Fun, but what's with much of the costuming? Asymmetric collars, lots of pale blue linen? Weird coats. I mean, we actually have a pretty good idea of period clothing, and that ain't it. Also, there are some nice swords, but the hero sword is beyond awful. Hand and a half, curved pointed quillions, and a piece of amber for a pommel?

Pearl Harbor (2001)

Why I like this film

[8/10 · 6 June 2015]

I am always confused by the amount of hate flung at this film. I have read dozens of biographies of pilots of ww2, and the film captures the romantic bravery of these men very well... The flying sequences were VERY good, the Battle of Britain sequence was brilliant (except for the "hammer down" thing. Sure, the Pearl harbor sequence was silly in places, like flying down streets, and the whole tower sequence, but fun silly. And the Doolittle thing was great. But here's my point. I first saw the film at a matinée, in an almost empty house. Most of the others were couples of the ww2 generation. At the end, as I left, these veterans were crying, holding each other tight as they left.