How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying

How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying. The Mirisch Corporation 1967.

Before watching the movie:

For as long as it runs, this blog will mostly center on the 80s and later, because that is what appeals to my tastes and what I’m most likely to have something to comment on beforehand. I’ve challenged myself to focus on older films for the last few weeks because I felt they needed more of a focus, but although the films themselves have been positive experiences, it’s mostly just created more work looking for older films and trying to fit my thoughts on them into the format of this blog. My reserve of pre-80s films has almost run out, so why not finish this run off with a musical that’s even on Broadway today?

So… a fun romp in song and dance that satirizes the business world. It sometimes seems like “Business” in the sense that this film presents it was never as keenly analyzed as in the 60s. Then I remember The Secret of My Success, which was made in the 80s and shows a young man climbing the ranks similarly.

It occurs to me to wonder if the children’s books How to be a Perfect Person in Just Three Days and Make Four Million Dollars by Next Thursday draw any direct inspiration from this story, though I doubt it.

Continue reading

Fitzwilly

Fitzwilly. The Mirisch Corporation 1967.

Before watching the movie:

I never realized how little I’ve seen of Dick Van Dyke’s work, or the fact that most of it is in television. Even more than Peter Sellers, Dick Van Dyke is just kind of an institution. It strikes me that his best work is in his films of the 1960s and 70s, because those show off not only his comic skill but also often the physicality he didn’t have opportunities to express in domestic sitcoms and is probably no longer capable of. I’m not saying I necessarily expect him to dance on rooftops in this film, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there was some slapstick for him to get into.

What sort of movie is this? Well, once again I’d never heard of it, but I’m expecting a madcap web of lies caper, and possibly some screwball elements.

Continue reading

After the Fox

After the Fox. United Artists et. al. 1966.

Before watching the movie:

There are only so many ways I can say “I hardly know a thing about this movie.” I’m sure that just means I’m getting more comfortable with blank pages than that I’m running out of movies to review that I know all too much about. I know there still exist films that I’ve wanted to see but haven’t gotten around to it, I’m just running out of ones I can think of or access. Also, I’m trying to stay out of the 80s and 90s for a while, so reputations are much more filtered.

Not to say that I’ve heard absolutely nothing about the movie. I recall it being recommended to me in conversation a few times. If it’s the one I’m thinking of, I’m surprised that I remembered the plot but not that it starred Peter Sellers.

In preparation for this movie, I tried to remember how many Sellers movies I’ve seen before, and couldn’t think of any outside the Pink Panther series other than Being There. However, on looking him up, I found at least half a dozen. I suppose he really does blend into comic roles completely. Someday I will watch his Muppet Show appearance, where he comments that he had his Self surgically removed.

I expect… that this film will be good. My preconceptions are too blank for much more.

Continue reading

What’s Up, Tiger Lilly?

What's Up, Tiger Lilly? Benedict Pictures 1966.

Before watching the movie:

Every summary I’ve seen of this movie is quick to note that when Woody Allen dubbed this Japanese movie he did so without regard to the plot, but if that’s the case, wouldn’t it be better to refer to it as recycling video for an entirely new plot? It’s not like that’s very uncommon, as evidenced by early anime imports and the first several seasons of Power Rangers.

The fact that it’s not trying to make much sense indicates that it’s even less like those and more like a more rehearsed, long-form version of Whose Line is it Anyway‘s “film dubs” game. Would anything on the cover, or perhaps anything at all suggest that the movie is concerned with finding the perfect egg salad recipe? That sounds like an adlibbed joke that comes back so much it’s the closest thing to a plot.

I hope to enjoy it, but I wonder if I’d more enjoy a couple hours of standup comedy.

Continue reading

Fantastic Voyage

Fantastic Voyage. 20th Century Fox 1966.

Before watching the movie:

I loved the concept of this movie when I first heard about it years ago. Matter shrinking, a tour of the human body, the body as a counterpart to outer space and alien worlds…

I’ve put it off for so long because films of the 60s and 70s, especially science fiction films, were focused on amazing imagery that looks badly dated today and moved at glacial paces. Aside from 2001: A Space Odyssey, I can’t think of a better opportunity for a filmmaker to stop and let the scenery flow over the acid-tripping audience than a submarine  drifting through the world inside the human body. Never mind the dying patient they belong to, aren’t those nerve fibers far out?

I just hope the storytelling of this movie won’t be as nonexistent as in 2001.

Continue reading

See No Evil, Hear No Evil

See No Evil, Hear No Evil. Tristar Pictures 1989.

Before watching the movie:

A blind man and a deaf man work together at a newsstand, get falsely accused of murder, and then get in trouble with criminals. Hilarious, right? That’s what all reports indicate. I can see where the humor comes in, namely that the two leads are Richard Pryor and Gene Wilder. I just have no idea what direction it could go other than the nebulous “madcap.” I fear it will be madcap comedy that could be accused of terrible taste.

Also, the last time I saw a Richard Pryor movie, it was Superman III, which while not as abysmal as Superman IV, was not helped by his presence. Apparently his partnership with Wilder has a good reputation, though. Also, this film is R-Rated so he won’t have to stick to harmless family fare. What I’ve seen of his Saturday Night Live guesting is hilarious (go watch “Word Association” if you haven’t seen it).

Continue reading

Look Who’s Talking

Look Who's Talking. Tristar Pictures 1989.

Before watching the movie:

I never had much interest in this movie, but it caught my attention. It does have some big names in it, but lots of duds do too. I always thought it wasn’t very good mostly on the basis of the fact that it has two incredibly derivative sequels, but I guess that’s a compliment really. The only unfavorable opinion I’ve seen of it is a contemporary MAD parody, but it’s in some way their job to criticize everything.

Looking more closely at it, the film does look like it has the potential to be more focused on being sweet and silly, rather than an obnoxious talking baby gets up to mischief farce like I always imagined it being.

Continue reading

Father of the Bride

Father of the Bride. Touchstone Pictures 1991.

Before watching the movie:

Here’s another for the “never wanted it enough to go get it” list. I’ve been somewhat interested in this film on the grounds that it’s a Steve Martin movie and it was fairly popular for a long time.

It looks enjoyable enough, just not necessarily a big enough movie to care as much as I seem to recall people did. Maybe I’ll get another L.A. Story experience out of it.

Also, I’m surprised to learn that Martin Short is in it. From what I know of his role, he’s probably only headlining because of his big name, but he’ll be fun to watch.

Continue reading

Family Plot

Family Plot. Universal Pictures 1976.

Before watching the movie:

I didn’t know Alfred Hitchcock did comedies, but here this is. I’ve read a few different synopses that seem to tell entirely different stories, but it seems to involve disreputable people, lots of money, and family relations.

The only thing I completely understand going in is that Alfred Hitchcock was involved, so there will be massive attention to detail.

Despite the massive changes coming my way this summer, I expect to be able to keep this blog going. However, that depends on how I assess the situation upon arrival.

Continue reading

AI: Artificial Intelligence

A.I.: Artificial Intelligence. Warner Brothers 2001.

Before watching the movie:

It’s not often that I come across a science fiction movie that I’m not looking forward to seeing. This film should have everything going for it. It was made recently, so should have a clean, appealing aesthetic. It’s about robots and what it means to be human. It was made by Stephen Spielberg. So why have I put this off for ten years?

I’m not looking forward to the story. It sounds too sad for me to enjoy. A child android is programmed to be completely human, but he’s still a robot in society’s eyes. Wait, that sounds like Bicentennial Man without Robin Williams. The problem I expect is that the robot in that movie was on a quest to make society understand him, but in this movie, since he is a child, I only expect harsh treatment and crying. Admittedly, that’s a little too simplistic. I fully expect this one to fall in the category of movies I liked better than I expected because my expectations were too low.

Continue reading