Change Your Image
jimrosa-11542
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Valachi Papers (1972)
Holds UP Reasonably Well But Riddled with Errors
This film was something of landmark when it came out in 1973 - the year after the original Godfather. While Charles Bronson wasn't yet the big star he became after Death Wish was released the following year, he carries the film very well. There are also some other noteworthy performances, particular Lino Ventura as Vito Genovese and Joseph Wiseman as Salvatore Maranzano.
I found the film still quite entertaining. The film was criticized at the time for its level of violence as well for some sloppy production values including two well known goofs. The first being the World Trade Center under construction in the background of a scene and and the other being the presence of modern day cars along with period cars in a driving scene with the Gap and Genovese's wife.
Despite its good qualities, I found myself constantly diverted by the many inaccuracies in a film which is really unforgivable in a film purported to be following the well researched book by Peter Maas. Many of the real life characters are factually mixed up. For example they show Tony Bender being a top aide to Maranzano when he was actually a close associate of Vito Genovese and was on the opposite side -the Masseria side not the Maranzano -side during the Castellamarese War. Gaetano Reina was not the underboss of Maranzano but was head a separate family (presently the Lucchese Family) who sympathized with Maranzano and was killed for it. He became post mortem Valachi's father in law so Valachi know very well who he was. Valachi even regretted in the Peter Maas book book how he should stayed with the Lucchese Family instead of going with the Genovese crowd after the Castellamarese War.
The worst error was showing Albert Anastasia as taking over as boss of the Luciano Family (now known as the Genovese Family) after Vito Genovese goes into exile in Italy in 1937. It was Frank Costello who took over from Genovese. Albert Anastasia at the time was underboss of an entirely separate mafia Family -The Mangano Family (now known as the Gambino family).
All this quibbling aside, it still holds up pretty well,
Mob Town (2019)
Wildly Inaccurate
For a movie supposedly based on fact they got an awful lot wrong. They show dates at the beginning that are off by a decade. Genovese fled the country in 1936 (not 1946) and returned in 1946 (not 1957) after the only witness against mysteriously jumped out of a high rise window while under police protection. Genovese plotted against Frank Costello, the boss of his family (still known as the Genovese Family) for 10 years. He then did try to have Costello killed in 1957..
But Albert Anastasia was boss of a different family (currently known as the Gambino family). Genovese had nothing to do with his death. That was instigated by Carlo Gambino, Anastasia's ambitious number 2. Genovese did benefit indirectly by Anastasia's death however.
Finally, the Mafia Commission meeting of 1956 had already been held at Joseph Barbara's house in Appalachin. The reason for holding the 1957 meeting (the subject of the movie) there was convenience since everyone already knew where it was and it was deemed secure. The scenes of Barbara and his wife agonizing are having the meeting there are ludicrous.
Curtiz (2018)
I want my two hours back.
When I saw this listed I was excited and thought it would be another "Hitchcock" telling the story of Michael Curtiz while focused on the making of Casablanca. Instead it turned out out to be a dark and depressing look at a pretty miserable guy. Which seems strange since the movie is Hungarian-made and purported to be a tribute to Curtiz, one of their national heroes who made it big in America.
Michael Curtiz has generally, and perhaps unfairly, never been considered one of Hollywood's great directors despite three Best Director nominations and one Oscar win (for Casablanca). He has often been characterized as no more than a highly professional, and extremely prolific, studio hack who somehow managed to make a number of great films including Casablanca, most of the best Errol Flynn films (including the Adventures of Robin Hood, Captain Blood, the Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex, and the Sea Hawk), Yankee Doodle Dandy, Mildred Pierce and White Christmas.
The film therefore should have been an interesting look at movie-making in the early 1940s. Casablanca was a troubled film from the start. It had a limited budget, an unfinished script, and a generally unpopular and dictatorial director. The studio did not consider it an important film despite assigning two popular starts, Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman, to it. In reality, things were so bad filming Casablanca that both Bogart and Bergman tried to quit. The actors all had to learn lines prepared the only night before. No one knew the ending and, in fact several endings were filmed and preview audience reactions were used to make the final decision. Yet somehow a masterpiece emerged. Should have been a great story.
Instead, in Curtiz we get a wildly inaccurate depiction of the making of the film. We get it characterized as some grandious propaganda mechamism propelled by shadowy US goverment figures driving the direction of the film and Curtiz fighting them. Most of plot revolves around Curtiz's ficticious daughter showing up on the set and the complications that ensue. We get an incredibly rediculous reference to a young Ronald Reagan (who was was orignally considered for the Bogart role) joing the army to "make America great again". The acting in Curtiz was uniformly poor, with the exception of Lengyel as Curtiz. But his character as written is so throughly loathsome you feel no sympathy or admiration for him. The film somehow got a few nominations for cinematography but this viewer got tired of the dark and shadowy look of everything. it just seemed depressing.
Casablanca turned out to be a masterpiece. Not so with Curtiz. I want my two hours back.