jromanbaker

As a child with a grubby small amount of money I could have got in without an adult in the UK to see this film. I would have been disturbed by the amount of threat and violence in it, and even now after seeing it I was shocked to know that one of the main characters had had his heart ripped out ( while alive ) and seeing his dead body thrown across a horse. And again even now I felt disturbed by the fate of the Native American woman being callously seduced, abandoned and her reaction - going headlong over a cliff her damaged body on the rocks below. No spoilers as to the actors names. The cast good enough and Cinemascope used well, but where were the seven cities of gold promised me in the title ? Not one in sight and instead a Native American camp and Jeffrey Hunter passing as its chief. Bad casting in my opinion and Anthony Quinn just walked through his role and so did Richard Egan. They are on a Spanish mission to conquer California and quite rightly the Native Americans living there are not happy. There is also a meddling priest played meekly by Michael Rennie, and yes he does produce an improbable miracle. He gets on everyone's nerves and he got on mine as usually he is a fine actor to watch. Clumsily directed the film seems much longer than its running time. To sum up the child in me would probably have had nightmares and also disappointed that no miracle could produce just one city of gold. A mediocre, pseudo historical film.

Frank Perry the director ( or most of the film ) made an extraordinary debut film ' David and Lisa ' but that was the very early 1960's and time and Hollywood had changed. Sexiness was pushed further when it was not needed, and a certain vulgarity of filming had set in. Despite the fact that nearly all the actors were in swimsuits, the film itself is devoid of eroticism. This is my opinion and in the two best scenes for me Burt Lancaster gives great depth to his enigmatic character. The first is teaching a young boy to swim in a swimming pool without water, and arguably saves his life and the second is with the great actor Janice Rule with whom he has had a previous relationship. Rule literally whips him with words while still denying her attraction to him. I think she should have had a supporting Oscar for this role, and her presence burns up the screen. Lancaster too is excellent playing a man who was either a wastrel or just someone in the wrong, far too affluent country club place, that would eventually do its best to annihilate him. Success can often breed failure and this film casts a bright light on material greed. Also this film is still relevant and my only gripe is that a few scenes towards the end tend towards melodrama, especially the one where Lancaster tries to cross a speeding highway, and frantically succeeds. It called to mind the penultimate scene from the 1950's ' Invasion of the Body Snatchers. ' Maybe its frantic approach was apt; Lancaster was in his way escaping the body snatchers of the rich. An almost great film.

' Love's Labour's Lost ' is in my opinion an underrated play. For me it is Shakespeare at his best, and despite the garden setting of this fine production the death of love as well as the love of love go hand in hand. Praise has been given to Jeremy Brett is well deserved, but so is the rest of the cast. This film version flows, and unlike the confinement of a stage breathes more easily and there are no stagey gimmicks and movement is all, as if life itself is eternal and will last forever. In this place the arrival of a messenger bringing death into the garden comes as a shock, and the bitter sweet flavour of the play is accentuated. Will the men be faithful once the women are gone ? Will a lasting night fall on their relationships ? A great play and a production that many 21st C directors could learn from.