ferrell

This is just an awful movie. I love The Lone Ranger saga. I have the entire television series. And many episodes of the radio series. I have seen all of the movies from the fifties. This one had such promise. This was Bill Fraker's opportunity to direct. He wanted to direct so badly. And he did. What's bad about this movie is mostly his fault. I knew Bill personally and respected him immensely as a cinematographer. But he was no director. As a side note, Speilberg and Lucas had approached him at this time to do a new movie. He turned them down because he had always wanted to direct and this was his chance. They came back at him and offered him 5% of the movie if he would shoot it. This was, at the time, an unprecedented offer. No below the line personnel had every been offered a piece of the movie. He struggled with the decision but eventually turned them down cold. The movie he turned down a piece of was the Indiana Jones franchise.

The overuse of the William Tell overture finale was heartbreaking. It did a fair job of telling the "legend" but it skimmed over key parts while bogging down with more trivial matters. Very, very slow for an action movie. Klinton Spilsbury wasn't as bad as everybody says he was. Clayton Moore was no Laurence Olivier himself. But Clayton Moore did fit the part for a Saturday morning kid's show.

I could go on and on, but I'm just sad that Jason Robards and Christopher Lloyd were wasted in their parts. This may have been Lloyd's first "bad guy" role. He certainly didn't seen to know what to do with it. Cinematography was good. Fraker oversaw that part of it well. Overall, painful to watch. Sorry.

I thought I would like it. But then I didn't. And then I thought it was strange. So I thought I would stick with it to see where it went. After the inciting incident takes place, it starts to pick up noticeably. In the end I was glad I watched it. Some truly classically funny moments.

Now I see some people didn't like it. Well, to each his own. Some people are just not ready for this kind of movie. I told my wife it was like "Dexter" on steroids. She wanted to watch it. Just as it began to get interesting, she quit. She doesn't have my patience.

I was fascinated in the credits with all the like names. So I looked it up here and on Wikipedia. I still can't get my head around how all the actors are related to each other. Wikipedia lists the budget at $5 mil. Where did all the money go? Not to the actors, director, writer or producers. It's all on location so no studio money. I think Wikipedia got this one wrong. I'd be surprised if the film cost more that $100,000.

The movie is rude, it's crude in spots. But Foley has given us some of life's "truisms" in ways never shown before. For that I give him kudos. A worthwhile effort. I gave it a 9 to try to balance out all of the unfair negative reviews. The acting was superb. The writing really had its moments. Give it a shot.

Don't get me wrong. I love the Dr. Kildare series. But there are problems.

First off, the title. The title indicates that this is a criminal case, not a civil case. The suit is in actuality, Marlow vs. Kildare, et al. If it were "The People",the district attorney would be prosecuting.

Secondly, Lionel Barrymore is as irritating as possible as Dr. Gillespie. Why in the world Dr. Kildare would want to work for him I just can't imagine. But that's not just this movie ... it's every Dr. Kildare film. A lovable yet irascible curmudgeon would be, i.e. Charles Laughton at his worst. But Lionel Barrymore is just ridiculous.

It was fun seeing Red Skelton, but losing Nat Pendleton in this one is disaster. I look forward to Nat Pendleton every bit as much as Lew Ayres and Laraine Day.

But at least Dr. Kildare was not guilty of misdiagnosing as he was in the last two episodes. Now there are really major problems with those two.

Marie Blake gets one good gag per picture. They should have used her more. She misses Nat Pendleton, too.

They never miss an opportunity to use "Nosey Parker", as if Nurse Parker is the origin of the phrase. Sorry, it's not true.

Bonita Granvillie has been maligned unjustly here. Her character really is only doing what anyone in the same circumstances would do. She wasn't out to get Dr. Kildare or Blair General Hospital. She honestly felt that she was the injured party and that she should recover damages if damages were due. I liked her in this part. I even thought her lawyer did a good job for her in the courtroom. I thought Tom Conway's character wasn't much of a courtroom brawler. He let her lawyer walk all over him.

This is supposed to be a medical drama, not a courtroom drama. And, as always, not enough alone time with Lew Ayres and Lariane Day. Also missed Samuel S. Hinds and Emma Dunn for the first time. Oh, well ... this series is winding down. So sad.