I watched, start to finish the other night, The Day of the Jackal(1973) and I offer these thoughts:
ONE: This is yet ANOTHER of the incredible array -- practically once a week -- of great studio films in that great movie year of 1973. This is another case where I checked the date -- 1973 -- and forgot that THAT came out that year too. My two favorites of 1973 were American Graffiti and Charley Varrick...but that still leaves room for The Sting and The Exorcist(for everybody but me, though its grown on me), The Way We Were, The Paper Chase, Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid, The Long Goodbye, Sleeper, Magnum Force, The Last Detail, Westworld, Soylent Green(the concept, not the movie, plus Eddie G's farewell) , Save The Tiger(not a fave, but Jack Lemmon's Best Actor Swan Song) , Paper Moon, Live and Let Die, The Laughing Policman, The Last of Sheila...I'll stop there and I KNOW I've missed some other good ones. And yeah -- Day of the Jackal.
TWO: The director was Fred Zinnemann, who directed the Oscar winning (and rather sex/violence oriented for its 1953 time) Best Picture winner "On the Waterfront" And he directed the 1966 Best Picture A Man For All Seasons(both a great play and great history.)
And yet, The Day of the Jackal was Zinneman's first film SINCE A Man For All Seasons. 7 years from one movie to the next - -with one big project called "Man's Fate" scuttled in between -- it had been cast and everything.
The point: Zinnemannwas as great in his own way -- and more Oscared - than Alfred Hitchcock, but found himself struggling to get projects off the ground even as Hitchcock seemed to get them out whenever he wanted to.
CONT
reply
share
roger1 (3626)
a month ago
THREE: Speaking of Hitchocck, The Day of the Jackal is in the tradition of a Hitchcock classic -- The Man Who Knew Too Much (I'll pick the opulent Technicolor 1956 version) is that both films are "stop the assassination" films, with characters racing to stop an assassin from shooting his human target "in the nick of time." We can add "The Manchurian Candidate" 1962 to that. In "Man '56" its James Stewart running to stop the assassin in time; in "The Manchurian Candidate," it is Sinatra running. In "The Day of the Jackal" it is ...Michael Lonsdale? Not a very big star -- though I"m sure bigger in "foreign films"(where I have little expertise.) I know Lonsdale as the villain in Moonraker (1979) where he points a gun at Bond and says "And now I am going to put you out of MY misery." Yeah right. BTW, facially, Lonsdale then looked a bit like...Peter Dinklage now. To me. Note in passing: John Frankenheimer directed The Manchurian Candidate '62 with Sinatra runningn to stop the assassination -- and 15 years later in 1977 he directed Robert Shaw running -- and flying in a helicopter -- to "stop the assassination of THOUSANDS of people -- in Black Sunday. Same concept -- just bigger.
FOUR: Speaking of Hitchcock, I thought of two late Hitchcock films as I watched The Day of the Jackal. The more "on point" one was "Topaz" because -- all the main characters are French(IN France) and they are government officials and law enforcement -- not quite the spies of Topaz, but close enough. Also as with both Topaz(1969) and Frenzy(1972) both made in the time vicinity of The Day of the Jackal -- evidently neither Hitchcock nor Zinnemann could get "big stars" for the leads. With Hitchcock, its because big stars turned him down on Topaz AND Frenzy. With Zinnemann -- well, MAYBE he wanted realism but...he (or the studio) wanted Michael Caine to play the Jackal -- the cold, handsome, lady-killing(sexually and for real) hired assassin.
CONT
reply
share
roger1 (3626)
a month ago
FIVE: We know that Michael Caine turned down the villain in Frenzy because he "didn't want to be associated with the (sick) part." I'm not so sure Caine was as upset with the more genteel professional killer in "Jackal" - - it may have been that his schedule was booked elsewhere -- but nonetheless with both Frenzy(1972) and Day of the Jackal(1973) we have "two Michael Caine movies that got away" -- with non-stars cast instead. Barry Foster in Frenzy; Edward Fox in Jackal --his brother James Fox had preceded him in both British films and some American ones(Thoroughly Modern Millie.)
SIX: Its interesting to contrast the savagery that Hitchcock lent to the key Frenzy killing to the absolute restraint that Zinnemann chooses for one particular killing in Jackal. In "Day of the Jackal," the Jackal (a slender, suave and handsome man) has LEGITMATELY sought a sexual affair with an attractive well-off married woman(the affair is not part of his plan) and she in turn, mixes love and lust for him. They make love a couple of times. But prior to the second time, the Jackal realizes that she can expose him, so in bed, after making love and as she sleeps, the Jackal leans over her body, applies a very brief amount of pressure to her neck -- and kills her. Compare this to Hitchcock electing to give us an extended, shot by shot, gasp by gurgle account of Brenda's strangling in Frenzy. One realizes that while Hitchocck was willing "to plumb the dark depths" of strangulation violence with an R rating, Zinnemann was not interested in that kind of realism at all. A later murder of a male victim by the Jackal is off screen --perhaps more akin to the unseen(at first) murder of Babs in Frenzy.
CONT
reply
share
roger1 (3626)
a month ago
SEVEN: Day of the Jackal got a few "masterpiece" four star reviews in 1973. It was based on a big bestseller by an author named Frederick Forsyth, and I think the critics were saluting Zinnemann for the precision and construction of his "thriller" --- which thrills in a much more dry and clinical way than, say, Frenzy. (I mean Day of the Jackal is about a plan to assassinate Charles DeGaulle, and in 1973, he was still alive so...the suspense had to be created even with that factual knowledge.)
EIGHT: And so, the movie moves on "parallel tracks" (1) the assassin going about his preparations and execution of his plot to get close enough to DeGaulle to shoot him, and (2) the efforts of a massive team of French officials and their policeman to "find the needle in the haystack" in time -- to locate, track down, and stop The Jackal. I'd say yes, it was pretty good in that regard -- much more semi-documentary than Hitchcock(there are no fancy camera angles or movements) and more "real" in the characters. (I suppose Hitchcock was offered this Universal release, but I can see why he would have turned it down.)
NINE: "Brief political observation": The assassin is foiled but not before he gets a too-quick rifle shot off at DeGaulle's head. DeGaulle(an actor) moves his head at just the right instant and the bullet passes his head. I could not help but be reminded of how close that bullet came to Candidate Trump this summer. I saw Day of the Jackal not long after that (first attempt) and its interesting to think how close we came to Trump's head exploding in a mass of blood had it hit(just like DeGaulle avoided "fictionally.")
CONT
reply
share
roger1 (3626)
a month ago
TEN: A word on the immaculate color scheme. Whereas in Frenzy, Hitchcock made sure to give us contrasting BRIGHT COLORS in background and costumes (Rusk's purple shirt and tie; Babs orange suitdress, Brenda's olive green dress) Zinneman and his team make sure that the Jackal "color scheme"(the movie, not just the man) looks TAN almost all the time, with a dash of yellow. The clothes. Edward Fox's blond hair(which figures in the manhunt for the Jackal -- blond men are grabbed and questioned EVERYWHERE.) The buildings. I suppose some of the "tan" texture was a matter of camera filters and lab processing, but it is very pleasing to the eye. I"ll bet "master of color schemes" Hitchcock was impressed.
ELEVEN: And whaddya know, even as the streamers prepare a "Rainmaker" miniseries, evidently a new Day of the Jackal" is ready to go -- with Oscar winner Eddie Redmayne in the Edward Fox part. Everything old is new again.
TWELVE: Yep, I do recall that a more "wild and unfaithful" remake of Day of the Jackal appeared in 1997 (ALSO a very busy movie year.) It was just called "The Jackal." Bruce Willis deigned to play one of his few villains -- in a much more colorful and action-packed and "movie-ish" version of the 1973 film. The entire "France and killing DeGaulle" plot was tossed; Richard Gere (as an Irish IRA man freed to try to catch Willis) was offered up as SOMEWHAT of a match to Willis' star power(but not enough) and Grand Old Sidney Poitier provided more of it. There's a nice bit where a cold, cruel Willis slowly blows off the body parts of weapons supplier Jack Black with a giant cannon to be used in the assassination.
CONT
reply
share
roger1 (3626)
a month ago
SUMMARY: I linger here for awhile on The Day of the Jackal 1973 because I didn't see it in 1973, have vague memories of watching it on cable in the 80s, less vague memories of being unimpressed by The Jackal (remake) blowing the story out of proportion -- and I find it a nice "puzzle piece found" movie from 1973 to be viewed in 2024. Finally watched it all the way through, 50 plus years later.
It IS a good movie, but limited by its own dry presentation and the non-suspense of waiting for Charles DeGaulle NOT to be killed. (I suppose the greater suspense lies in the innocent people either killed -- or not killed --by the Jackal along the way.) Still, in its very realism, Day of the Jackal 1973 rather easily trounces The Jackal (remake) as a truly involving movie.
CONT
reply
share
roger1 (3626)
a month ago
Well, I don't think an "OT Potpourri" can be limited to just two items, so I'll toss in a third:
Guy Ritchie.
I've had reason to consider him in 2024. First, he put out a "Dirty Dozen/Guns of Navarone" clone called "The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare" earlier in the year. The bows to Navarone were MOST savory to me(its alternates as my favorite of 1961), especially when our "men on a mission" killed a bunch of Nazis boarding their boat. He put Big Henry Cavill (a former Superman and a star who refuses to ignite) in the lead and gave him a BIGGER (physically) co-star Alan Ritchson(currently the Giant Hero Jack Reacher on streaming) and a beautiful woman for the team(Eiza Gonzalez) and Winston Churchill giving the mission(shades of Rod Taylor in Inglorious Basterds) and...I liked it.
More recently (for me, maybe its been there awhile) there's been a Ritchie series on ...Hulu? Netflix? I can't remember ...called The Gentleman, based on a just-before-COVID 2019 Guy
Ritchie MOVIE of the same name starring Matthew McConaghey as a Yank working a pot empire in London.
As Ritchie points out, his new "Gentlemen" series uses some of the same "pot industry in England" elements of the original, but drops Matthew and sticks to two British leads -- a handsome man(Theo James) and a beautiful woman(Kaya Scolelario) and puts them together as a non-romantic (yet) team VS all manner of rival drug lord power players, gangs, and killers.
CONT
reply
share
roger1 (3626)
a month ago
"The Gentlemen" sweetens the pot (as all such series must) in giving us two "name" actors in supporting parts: (1) Giancarlo Esposito (The Chicken Man Mogul in Breaking Bad) as one crime boss and (2) Ray Winstone(The Departed, Sexy Beast) as another. Neither man -- especially Winstone -- was quite in Season 1 enough to participate in much of the plot, but each man COUNTS just by showing up. I've been a fan of Winstone's for some time -- he's a big guy with an accent and a general heavyset cool. Remember him as Nicholson's right hand man in The Departed? Remember him trying to stave off the ferocious madman Ben Kingsley in Sexy Beast, from forcing him to do "one more job" (but "A'hm rett-YUHED," Winstone keeps protesting -- "I'm retired.")
I linger on Guy Ritchie in this moment for a few reasons: (1) Our great crime/action directors -- Don Siegel(Dirty Harry, Charley Varrick), and Sam Peckinpah are long dead, others are getting up there in age (Walter Hill) and QT barely works anymore(with just one more movie left, he says.) And yet, Guy Ritchie seems to show up quite regularly to deliver "good exciting crime story entertainment." Or a WWII story. Thus, in 2024 Guy has delivered the goods TWICE -- The Ungentlemanly Men and the Gentleman.
Ritchie has stylistic touches -- words of dialogue or of interest float onto the screen when characters talk about them. HIs action sequences(whether personally directed or loaned out to his TV episode directors) are fun. Handsome guys. Pretty ladies. Good music (And the Gentlemen brings back Ritchie fave Vinnie Jones in one good guy/tough guy part.)
CONT
reply
share
roger1 (3626)
a month ago
Guy Ritchie actually works a lot these days, to the good and to the not so good:
Good: The Man From UNCLE. Henry Cavill trying to be a star again(in a role vacated by George Clooney -- no longer bankable) as Napoleon Solo, with the dear departed Armie Hammer as Illya Kuriyakin. It was fun listening to Cavill try to channel Robert Vaughn's voice as Napoleon Solo. Hugh Grant came in as "Waverly" (the Leo G. Carroll role)...Mr. Grant has aged nicely into somewhat rogue-like roles -- no longer the stuttering/stammering young ingenue and now wrinkled and grouchy and up to no good. (Grant was similarly the oily devil in Ritchie's MOVIE of The Gentlemen.)
Not so good: Operation Fortune. I saw this on an airplane last year and can't remember a thing -- other than my current crush Aubrey Plaza was in it(the older she gets the more her Parks and Recreation deadpan act gets sexy -- looks too.) And yet -- says here -- Jason Statham was in it(he started strong in The Transporter but seems a bit too overfamiliar these days) along with Cary Elwes and..Hugh Grant(surprise.)
Not seen: The Wrath of Man. I just learned that Guy Ritichie directed this. I haven't seen it. Its got Jason Statham in it. (Ritchie's DeNiro or Leo per Scorsese?")
And of course, if one "cycles back through time" we find Ritichie directing the Disney Aladdin remake(with Will Smith as the genie) and the Sherlock Holmes "series" (2 movies for RDJ to slum away from Iron Man in), and the Madonna marriage and ALL THE WAY BACK to Lock Stock and Smoking Barrels and Snatch(with Brad Pitt slumming away from superstardom.)
Yeah, the more I think of the titles above -- and of the entertainment value of the "Ungentlemanly" men and The Gentlemen in 2024 -- the more I like having Mr. Ritchie around to give us his brand of crime stories and action.
PS. A fourth OT potpourri item:
Even as Guy Ritchie's "Gentlemen" series amused me -- Season Two is in pre-production -- the ongoing "Only Murders in the Building" series on Hulu continues its rather twee and precious and cozy murder-mystery solving in Season 4. Steve Martin and Martin Short(Two Amigos, great pals...Old)..Selena Gomez(young...with a great high-pitched and reedy voice), keep the demographics diverse but I really think its an "old people's show" and I"m NOT that old yet.
But the guest stars (movie and TV tested) have flooded Season 4 so far: Meryl Streep and Melissa McCarthy and Paul Rudd and DaVine Joy Randolph(recently Oscared for The Holdovers) and "as themselves" -- the three stars hired to play Martin, Short and Gomez" in a "movie within the series -- Eugene Levy(himself), Zach Galifianakis(himself) and Eva Longoria(herself) -- its really almost too much of a celeb party to which we aren't invited. (Plus SNL alum Molly Shannon doing a fingernails-on-the-blackboard irritating bit as a Hollywood phony and in-fighter.) Plus the delightful Jane Lynch as "this year's victim." I mean -- that's a lot of stars. (Tina Fey, Nathan Lane and even Shirley MacLaine showed up in earlier seasons. Shirley goes on forever.)
I mention Only Murders in the Building because its the "too precious" alternative to the "good, tough and sexy" "The Gentlemen." Still, I'll finish both series if I can.
Man does not live by Psycho alone, you see?
reply
share