Singin’ in the Rain, 1952 – ★★★★

For my 300th (and final!) movie of 2024, I decided to go out on a high, with what a vast majority of critics (inlcuding Siskel and Ebert) alongside multiple online aggregate sites list as ‘The Greatest Musical Ever Made!’ Yep, I sat down in the middle of a severe weather warning for wind and rain on New Years Eve with my partner, and together in the warm glow of the christmas lights, we watched ‘Singing in the Rain’ for the first time ever. And we had a pretty great time.

The films set in the 1920s and follows Silent film lethario ‘Don Lockwood’ (Played by Gene Kelly) and his malicious co-star Lina Lamont (Jean Hagan) Linas maliciousness is spurred by the fact that Don really just, isnt that into her, despite her being MASSIVELY into him. The pair are icons of California appearing as THE romantic pairing in all of the major films of the day.

But one fateful night, two incidents will set in motion events that will change the face of Hollywood forever. The first is Don, while being hoarded by fans, tries to escape by jumping into the car of one ‘Kathy Selden’ (Debbie Reynolds) at first the pair cant stand each other, with Kathy insulting Dons acting ability and Don swiping at Kathy for being a lower rung on the actors ladder than he is. But after another encounter later at a party being held by the head of ‘Monumental Pictures’ (R.F Simpson) Don is left swooning by Kathys attitude and way of being…which only upsets Lina even more when she clearly sees he’s more interested in Kathy than her AND during the party Kathy accidentally sends an entire birthday cake into linas face.

The other incident is that, while at the party, R.F Announces a special treat, revealing a new revolution in moviemaking…Sound. specifically they cite that warner brothers is soon to release the first fully talking picture ‘The Jazz Singer’…They’re not worried though as, at this point, its just being seen as a gimmick…That is until ‘The Jazz Singer’ does gangbusters at the box office, leading ‘Monumental’ to urgently rework all their ‘in production’ silent films into ‘talkies’.

For Don, thats not a problem, he’s maybe a little stiff on delivery and line memory, but he’s fine…But Lina? she has a voice that could cut a two by four in half. She cant remember lines, she has trouble pronouncing words…She isnt built for the ‘Talkies’…But you know who is? Kathy. And when Don and Kathy are reunited. the pair along with Dons lifetime friend Cosmo hatch a scheme to put Kathy on the map, while also keeping Lina from stirring up trouble…IF they can pull it off that is.

And y’know what? I think ‘Greatest Musical Ever’ is *probably* an overstatement. But I’ll tell you what, this is a MORE than fantastic little musical that had me grinning for most of the runtime.

In an era where musicals were often a little…’rigid’. Where they basically came in three flavours, ‘Very serious and dower’, ‘Farsical comedies’, or ‘Opera’. ‘Singing in the Rain’ breaks new ground by looking at the framework of the ‘muscial’ genre up to that point and remodelling it with the slightly more swinging and hip sensibilities of the 1950s.

Its a musical that inherently takes itself VERY seriously, with careful consideration put into every dance routine, line delivery and musical number. and BECAUSE it spends so much time trying to master the hard stuff to the point it looks effortless, it grants them the tremendous fortune of being able to actually PLAY the film as a bit self aware, a bit laid back. a more natural happening, rather than an almost pained movie of routine after routine.

And everyone in this film quite literally put their blood sweat and tears into the production (I lost a lot of respect for Kelly over this film) but it cant be denied the end result is a masterwork. A film that from top to bottom feels like its been optimised almost to the point of perfection for the genre at that time.

For a starters the script is a VERY pacy hour and 42 minutes long, the tone is easy going, playing for laughs, but not to TOO much of an obnoxious degree. he cast are charming, charismatic and entertaining throughout. I had a warm smile for most of the runtime on this thing just watching the antics go down, and there are some really solid laughs in this to boot too!

The songs are well paced out, not *too* often, but plentiful enough (and consistent with hits) to keep you engaged. I feel its biggest triumph is taking an element of movie history (the jump to the talkie) and actually managing to translate it not only into a successful musical, but an entertaining and well played one at that. It could have been SO easy to mess this up, and wind up with an insincere piece that felt flat and too tied to the time to be fun. But they relish every scene their in with quirky dialogue and *just* the right amount of snark as and when required to just about keep the production afloat for the whole runtime.

In fact my only criticism is the somewhat surreal ‘Gotta Dance’ sequence in the 3rd act…Which for me? while VERY nicely handled, did feel out of place with the rest of the movie and seemed to go on for an AGE. I understand why its there because it helps to further work on Don as a character a bit. But I think it could have been cut, or at the very least trimmed a fair bit and this would have been even better still.

Direction is frankly superb, the dance numbers are cited as some of the most difficult routines in musical history, Debbie Reynolds hadnt done anything like this before and somehow, via supernatural powers or the pure wrath of Gene Kelly, they managed to pull off some of the most memorable, creative and interesting direction that i’ve seen in a movie in a good while, constantly shapeshifting and evolving, theres sequences in this film that feel 30 years fresher than they actually are. It honestly blew my mind to find out this was 1952, as i’d have had it as a late 50s film truthfully.

Direction of the cast is extroadinary as well, again these were NOT easy routines to learn and Kelly, Reynolds and O’Connor MASTER them. I dont think i’ve ever seen footwork and intensity in a performance anywhere quite like whats shown here. its truely remarkable. Concerning…But remarkable.

As for the cine, its beautiful, intense and creative sequences flow beautifully from one scene to the next, theres room for creative compositions that most all land, sequence building is a little stiff in places (but it is 1952) and I think a little more B-roll would have got it over the line fully for me…But its a minor grumble, this thing looks fantastic, its vivid, colourful, engaging, SHOWS more than it tells and the edit is seamless, equally smooth and frankly an utter delight.

Performance wise, Debbie Reynolds and Gene Kelly are astounding. Given what we know Kelly did to Reynolds through this production I almost feel perverse praising him here. But the pair really do have a strong on screen chemestry, they both astound in their roles delivering fantastic performances that largely (and successfully) carry the film from start to finish.

Donald O’Connor and Jean Hagan as Cosmo and Lina equally delight as comedy foils for the production, with O’Connor *maybe* just about pushing the comedy foil a bit *too* far for my taste. But never full crossing the line. and Hagan is just perfect as Lina, giving a performance thats rich, multi layered and varied. I laughed at her when we found out her voice was a dud for ‘talkies’ I winced when she started flexing her stranglehold on the studios when she found out they were employing Kathy. It takes a strong performance to be able to play both the victim of comedy, the comic foil AND the villainess all at the same time, all in one movie. But she really truely nails it delivering a memorable performance that helps tie the whole thing together.

And as if I could review this without talking about the soundtrack. the titular ‘Singing in the Rain’ is a wonderful classic, but ‘Good Morning (to you)’, ‘Gotta Dance’, ‘Make ’em Laugh’ and ‘Moses’ are all show stoppers in their own right and really showcase the talent both on screen and the crew behind it. I was beyond impressed and was in awe of the craftsmanship behind it.

Is ‘Singing in the Rain’ the greatest musical ever made? In my opinion? im not fully convinced. I could easily see a point where, through re-watches, this becomes one of my favourite musicals. In terms of technical ability it almost certainly is in the top 3. But for me? this is just a really solid, charming and astounding work that is guarenteed to raise even the sourest of moods and was a fantastic way for me to see out 2024. The only thing better than finishing ‘Singing in the Rain’ is knowing a next time will always be on the cards.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/singin-in-the-rain/

The Dumb Waiter, 1979 – ★★★★

Probably the best entry so far that I’ve seen in all of the ‘Short Sharp Shock’ boxsets. ‘The Dumb Waiter’ is a simple stalked/home Invasion piece in which a woman is contacted by a man claiming to be following her, and from there the action and tension just keeps getting ratcheted higher and higher.

I’m going to keep my thoughts on the script to a minimum because, it is a quite short film and I don’t want to spoil it. But the direction and cine are really rock solid, reminding me very strongly of the sense of isolation and creativity seen in Bob Clarkes ‘Black Christmas’…which I’m sure is probably one of the higher honours I can bestow a short like this.

Tense, creative and the first film in ANY of these sets to genuinely have me on the edge of my seat, ‘The Dumb Waiter’ is a fine fine movie. And one I can definitely recommend.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-dumb-waiter-1979/

The Face of Darkness, 1976 – ★★½

A real shame honestly. What we have here is a pretty decent idea, a nasty racist politician ressurects an occultism from the 15th century to aid him in passing what (at the time) was heavily draconian legislation…but by modern standards is par of the course seemingly…Only to wind up biting off more than he could chew.

It’s a simple idea with scope to be really effective…and the film looks great with some pretty solid performances to boot!

The problem is this movie is just shy of an hour…and the idea can seemingly only really sustain 25 minutes…meaning at least half the movie feels like padding…and not particularly interesting padding at that.

Not helping matters either, the actual plot beyond that initial pitch gets VERY contrived and confusing fairly quickly making a film that was already a bit of a drag, even harder to stay invested in even as the final minutes drew in.

I ultimately started clock watching by the 35 minute mark, and was checking my phone by 50 minutes…its a shame really, as I think had this been 30 minutes, it’d probably have been at least a star and a half higher for me…ah well, can’t be lucky every time.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-face-of-darkness/

Screaming Lord Sutch: Jack the Ripper, 1965 – ★★★½

A somewhat rarely seen music video for Screaming Lord Suches novelty hit ‘Jack The Ripper’ as produced by Joe Meek.

A little basic, but some interesting cine choices and it’s nice to see a music video getting the full colour film treatment, when generally most of these kind of promo films would have been shot on B&W tape.

Looks good, sounds good, I got no issues.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/screaming-lord-sutch-jack-the-ripper/

Mingoloo, 1958 – ★★★½

Continuing my look through Volume 2 of the ‘Short Sharp shocks’ boxset. We have ‘Mingoloo’ a…frankly bizarre piece that is probably the complete opposite of a ‘Short Sharp shock’ (unless the shock is how much the writer/director had only contempt for women) but is strangely surreal enough so as to he compelling.

The plot? A sculpture awakens from a strange dream where he’s compelled to create a statue of a dog in a Asian art style. While investors visit the studio, one of them spots the sculpture, assumes the artists apprentice made it and essentially tries to schmooze the statue out of her for nefarious purposes.

It’s basically a 20 minute borderline screwball comedy that most reminded me of the old Harry Enfield sketch ‘Women: Know your limits’ only, while Harry Enfields sketchs were super self aware and mocked that kind of attitude. This was VERY sincere in its opinion that women SHOULD only be there to support men and be pretty. Which I still can’t quite believe was still a thing as late as the late 50s…

The direction and cine are basic, but fine enough. There’s a fair few continuity errors across the board with this one. But it’s so daft that I actually kind of can’t hate it too much. Given everything I’ve seen in Volume 1 and disc 1 of Volume 2 so far…its actually one of the more standout pieces…I know that’s not saying much, but it is…I think it’s almost certainly worth catching at least once just to laugh at for how regressive it is as a work.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/mingoloo/

Escape from Broadmoor, 1948 – ★

I don’t trust any film that ends with an extended text crawl from the writer/director basically saying ‘who do you believe out of these 3 unreliable narrators, each of which has a fanciful reason as to why their story is wrong…The End.’

What a waste of time. A UK attempt at noir that’s staler than a 3 day past sell by baguette and sloppier than Oatmeal on dairy day.

Jesus…

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/escape-from-broadmoor/

The Three Children, 1946 – ★★★★

What If ‘Carnival Of souls’ was a PIF? Well! If you’ve ever wondered that, firstly…what?, get some help. But secondly! This! This is what it would be! The road safety equivalent of ‘Dark and Lonely Water’ This short warns that 3 children a day are taken away by a terrifying spectre that is death.

I think it’s terrific, ahead of its time and genuinely spooky. Great stuff!

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-three-children/

Quiz Crime No. 2, 1944 – ★½

I’m gonna keep it brief. It had pretty much the same issues as Quiz Crime #1 but here at least the mysteries made a *little* bit more sense and *could* probably actually be solved without directly being told some blurry bollocks in the background of one shot was the key to all of it.

I also preferred the detective in this one over the first…he seemed a bit more charismatic and invested.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/quiz-crime-no-2/

Quiz Crime No. 1, 1943 – ★

Kicking off volume 2 of the ‘Short Sharp shocks’ series from the BFI, I was quite hopeful that ‘Quiz Crime #1’ would be a bit of a lark.

Essentially a ‘whodunnit’ narrated to you by a detective who cracked the case! A thrilling quasi new years treat!

Unfortunately; ‘Quiz Crime’ is a silly thing, that doesn’t play by the rules. What do I mean? Well…prepare to have a 81 year old set of mysteries spoiled…because lord knows you won’t get them yourself.

The first case was one of a man who was found dead and stripped of belongings in the woods. Our detective goes to the Inn he was supposed to have checked into to speak to the bar keeper. Who denies the man ever arrived and invites you to check his room.

Our detective scours the room, plays with some golf clubs, and then arrests the barman and charges him with the murder! How were we supposed to crack the case?! Well! In the room the detective enters, in the background, is a table laid out ready for supper. The detective notes that the golf clubs delivered to the room are for a left handed golfer. And therefore HOW could the barman have KNOWN to set the table for a left handed person IF the victim DIDNT attend the bar!

(Literally, they expect you to have picked up on a blurry background detail that never actually gets brought up to crack the case…)

The second case is an actress who is murdered before her play is set to begin. This time around, I ignored the clues and just picked the first man the detective spoke to…7 minutes later with NON of the clues really making sense…I was right….these were terrible…a nice idea…but terrible.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/quiz-crime-no-1/