A few weeks ago, I watched the original "Ocean's Eleven" and was surprised how much I enjoyed the picture. However, my experience with a few other so-called 'Rat Pack' films since has not been as good--with a couple of thoroughly pedestrian films like "Four For Texas" and "Sergeants 3" offering some disappointing viewing. Now I am not saying these were bad films--but it sure looked as if the actors were more going through the motions than trying to create a realistic and entertaining film.
In "Sergeants 3", the biggest problem is that they decided to remake a film that was already a classic in no need of a remake. "Gunga Din" is a wonderful film....so why remake it? And, if you do, why not spend more time working out the plot? Sammy Davis stands in for the Gunga Din character. This could have worked but wasn't very logical. After all, if this guy loved the US Cavalry, why not just sign him up, as the Cavalry out west was often made up of black soldiers (dubbed 'Buffalo Soldiers' by the local tribes)?! Why have him tag about and not sign him up? And, why have a sophisticated guy like Davis play a recently freed slave? He certainly didn't seem very believable in this role. Even less believable was the ending--with a fight between American Indians and Cavalry soldiers that made me laugh. Cannon shots seemed to hit EVERY Indian even remotely nearby, Joey Bishop swung his rifle like a club to hit a guy and missed by about 8 miles--yet the guy fell off the horse like he'd been hit. In fact, this sort of thing happened A LOT--with Indians falling off horses right and left like I'd never seen in a western! SO was there anything I particularly liked about the film? Not much--other than the very lovely location shoot at Bryce Canyon (which is gorgeous--at least when they weren't recreating it on a set in a few cheesy shots). The bottom line is that the film never should have been made in the first place and I can only assume it was an excuse for the friends to get together, have a few drinks and, if they had time, make a movie. Not inspired but not totally awful.
In "Sergeants 3", the biggest problem is that they decided to remake a film that was already a classic in no need of a remake. "Gunga Din" is a wonderful film....so why remake it? And, if you do, why not spend more time working out the plot? Sammy Davis stands in for the Gunga Din character. This could have worked but wasn't very logical. After all, if this guy loved the US Cavalry, why not just sign him up, as the Cavalry out west was often made up of black soldiers (dubbed 'Buffalo Soldiers' by the local tribes)?! Why have him tag about and not sign him up? And, why have a sophisticated guy like Davis play a recently freed slave? He certainly didn't seem very believable in this role. Even less believable was the ending--with a fight between American Indians and Cavalry soldiers that made me laugh. Cannon shots seemed to hit EVERY Indian even remotely nearby, Joey Bishop swung his rifle like a club to hit a guy and missed by about 8 miles--yet the guy fell off the horse like he'd been hit. In fact, this sort of thing happened A LOT--with Indians falling off horses right and left like I'd never seen in a western! SO was there anything I particularly liked about the film? Not much--other than the very lovely location shoot at Bryce Canyon (which is gorgeous--at least when they weren't recreating it on a set in a few cheesy shots). The bottom line is that the film never should have been made in the first place and I can only assume it was an excuse for the friends to get together, have a few drinks and, if they had time, make a movie. Not inspired but not totally awful.