As some of our regular readers undoubtedly know, I am involved in a few weekly watch parties. On Twitter, I host #FridayNightFlix every Friday and I co-host #ScarySocial on Saturday. On Mastodon, I am one of the five hosts of #MondayActionMovie! Every week, we get together. We watch a movie. We tweet our way through it.
Tonight, at 10 pm et, I will be hosting #FridayNightFlix! The movie? 1973’s Jesus Christ Superstar!
If you want to join us this Friday, just hop onto twitter, find Jesus Christ Superstar on Prime, start the movie at 10 pm et, and use the #FridayNightFlix hashtag! I’ll be there happily tweeting. It’s a friendly group and welcoming of newcomers so don’t be shy.
There’s several reasons I love this scene but mostly it just comes down to the fact that it captures the explosive energy that comes from watching a live performance. Larry Marshall (who plays Simon Zealotes) has one of the most fascinating faces that I’ve ever seen in film and when he sings, he sings as if the fate of the entire world depends on it. That said, I’ve never been sold on Ted Neely’s performance as Jesus but Carl Anderson burns with charisma in the role of Judas.
Mostly, however, I just love the choreography and watching the dancers. I guess that’s not that surprising considering just how important dance was (and still is, even if I’m now just dancing for fun) in my life but, to be honest, I’m probably one of the most hyper critical people out there when it comes to dance in film, regarding both the the way that it’s often choreographed and usually filmed. But this scene is probably about as close to perfect in both regards as I’ve ever seen. It goes beyond the fact that the dancers obviously have a lot of energy and enthusiasm and that they all look good while dancing. The great thing about the choreography in this scene is that it all feels so spontaneous. There’s less emphasis on technical perfection and more emphasis on capturing emotion and thought through movement. What I love is that the number is choreographed to make it appear as if not all of the dancers in this scene are on the exact same beat. Some of them appear to come in a second or two late, which is something that would have made a lot of my former teachers and choreographers scream and curse because, far too often, people become so obsessed with technical perfection that they forget that passion is just as important as perfect technique. (I’m biased, of course, because I’ve always been more passionate than perfect.) The dancers in this scene have a lot of passion and it’s thrilling to watch.
4 Or More Shots From 4 Or More Films is just what it says it is, 4 shots from 4 of our favorite films. As opposed to the reviews and recaps that we usually post, 4 Shots From 4 Films lets the visuals do the talking!
102 years ago, on this date, Marlon Brando was born in Omaha, Nebraska. One of the greatest of American actors and one of the main reasons why so many young actors became enamored with the Method, Marlon Brando played many roles in our culture. When he was young, he was a Broadway bad boy. When he went out to Hollywood, he became a legitimate movie star. In the 60s, he was a cautionary tale as his career suffered a series of notorious flops. In the 70s, he made a comeback and, in during the final years of his career, he was as known for his eccentricities as for his talent. It’s a shame that those eccentricities overshadowed Brando as an actor. When he wanted to be, he was one of the best to ever appear on stage or in the movies.
In honor of the wonderful, tragic, and talented Marlon Brando, it’s time for….
4 Shots From 4 Marlon Brando Films
A Streetcar Named Desire (1951, dir by Elia Kazan, DP: Harry Stradling)
On The Waterfront (1954, dir by Elia Kazan, DP: Boris Kaufman)
The Godfather (1972, dir by Francis Ford Coppola, DP: Gordon Willis)
Apocalypse Now (1979, dir by Francis Ford Coppola, DP: Vittorio Storaro)
“This is some Lord of the Rings bullshit!” — Grace
Ready or Not is a sharp, nasty, and often very funny horror-comedy that turns a nightmare wedding into a vicious class satire. It works best when it embraces its wild premise with full confidence, even if some of its deeper ideas are only lightly explored.
Directed by Tyler Gillett and Matt Bettinelli-Olpin, the film follows Grace, played by Samara Weaving, on what should be the happiest night of her life, only for her new in-laws to force her into a lethal game of hide-and-seek. That setup is simple, but it gives the movie a strong engine: one part survival thriller, one part dark comedy, and one part social commentary about money, power, and inherited privilege. The elegance of the concept is that it does not need much explanation to be effective, because the rules are clear, the stakes are immediate, and the movie wastes little time before letting the chaos begin.
The biggest strength of Ready or Not is Samara Weaving’s performance. Grace is written as someone who feels believable under pressure, which matters because the film asks her to go through absurd, increasingly brutal scenarios while still retaining her humanity. Weaving handles the tonal balancing act extremely well, moving between fear, frustration, disbelief, and darkly comic determination without losing the character’s core. She gives the film an emotional anchor, and without that, the movie would risk becoming just another splatter-heavy genre exercise.
The supporting cast also deserves credit because the Le Domas family is not just rich, but memorably awful in different ways. Adam Brody, Andie MacDowell, Henry Czerny, and the rest of the ensemble help create a household that feels polished on the surface and rotten underneath. Their performances are broadly heightened, but that fits the movie’s tone. The family’s panic, incompetence, and stubborn devotion to tradition become part of the joke, and the film gets a lot of mileage out of watching these people unravel while trying to appear dignified.
Tonally, the movie is strongest when it leans into the tension between horror and comedy. The violence is graphic, but the film rarely treats gore as the whole point; instead, it uses bloodshed as part of a larger joke about entitlement and ritual. That gives the movie a mischievous energy. It wants you to laugh at the absurdity of the situation while still feeling the danger, and for the most part it succeeds. The pacing is also a real asset, since the film avoids spending too long on setup and gets to the conflict quickly. Once the game begins, it keeps finding new ways to escalate the mayhem.
Thematically, Ready or Not is clearly aiming at class resentment and inherited wealth, and that angle gives the film bite. The Le Domas family represent old money, secrecy, and self-preserving tradition, and the movie uses their ridiculous customs to expose how fragile that world really is. There is a satirical edge to how the film portrays privilege as both absurd and dangerous, especially when the family’s traditions are treated with near-religious seriousness. At the same time, the movie is not especially subtle about this, and that can be either a strength or a limitation depending on what you want from it.
That lack of subtlety is one of the film’s few weaknesses. The “eat the rich” angle is easy to understand, but it is not always developed with much nuance, and some viewers may wish the script pushed its social ideas further. The mythology behind the family’s tradition is also deliberately loose, which helps the movie stay nimble but can make the lore feel less important than the film suggests it should be. In addition, the third act gets increasingly outrageous, and while that is part of the fun, not every twist lands with the same force. A few viewers may find the ending more satisfying than the logic that gets it there.
Even so, the film’s swagger largely carries it through those rough spots. Ready or Not understands that tone is everything in a movie like this, and it keeps its balance surprisingly well for something so gleefully chaotic. It is gory without becoming tedious, funny without undercutting the danger, and mean-spirited without losing sympathy for its lead. That is not an easy combination to pull off, and the filmmakers deserve credit for making the material feel brisk and controlled rather than sloppy or overextended.
What makes Ready or Not memorable is that it knows exactly what kind of movie it is. It is not trying to be profound in the heavy, prestige-drama sense, but it is smarter than a simple bloodbath and more disciplined than a pure shock machine. Its pleasures come from its energy, its attitude, and its willingness to let a ridiculous premise keep escalating without apology. The result is a horror-comedy with enough style, bite, and performance power to remain entertaining even when its thematic ambitions are a little broader than deep.
In the end, Ready or Not is a highly watchable genre piece with a terrific lead performance, a savage sense of humor, and a premise that stays potent from beginning to end. It is not perfect, and its satire can feel a little blunt, but it delivers exactly what it promises: a tense, bloody, darkly funny ride through a family dinner from hell.
In 2022’s The Wrong High School Sweetheart, Mea Wilkerson plays Danielle, a real estate agent who dated Danny (Alex Trumble) in high school. (Dani and Danny! How cute!) Danielle and Danny broke up when Danny went off to college on a baseball scholarship. Now, Danny has returned home and he’s eager to start things up again with Danielle. Danielle’s wimpy fiancé, Tod (Doug Rogers), isn’t happy about that.
“You just had the wrong high school sweetheart,” Vivica A. Fox says once it’s become obvious that Danny is psychotic. Vivica plays the high school principal. For some reason, she is best friends with her former student, Danielle. Vivica A. Fox appears in all of the “Wrong” films and she’s usually cast as an authority figure. It almost always falls on her to say the film’s title. Sometimes, she’s a bit judgmental. If she says you “picked,” the wrong person, you know everything is your fault. In this once, she makes it clear that Danielle is not to blame because she “just had” the wrong person in her life. It’s always a fun to see Vivica in these films.
The “Wrong” films are almost always entertaining. The Wrong High School Sweetheart certainly is. David DeCoteau’s campy sensibility is uniquely suited to these films. The Wrong High School Sweetheart features Danny chanting, “Stronger than steel/Hotter than the sun/Danny Brooks won’t stop/Til he gets the job done!” while exercising in his underwear. Alex Trumble throws himself into the role of Danny and good for him.
As always with the “Wrong” films, some familiar faces show up in small roles. Tracy Nelson plays a therapist. And, of course, Eric Roberts shows up as a detective. Hopefully, we’ll get a sequel called The Wrong Detective.
Previous Eric Roberts Films That We Have Reviewed:
Cecil B. DeMille is often unfairly dismissed as a director, just as Charlton Heston is often underrated as an actor. To me, this is one of the most powerful scenes in DeMille’s filmography. The sound of the screams is haunting. However, one must remember that, as with all the plagues that afflicted Egypt, the Pharoah was given fair warning.
4 Shots from 4 Films is just what it says it is, 4 shots from 4 of our favorite films. As opposed to the reviews and recaps that we usually post, 4 Shots from 4 Films lets the visuals do the talking!
4 Shots From 4 Biblical Epics
Samson and Delilah (1949, dir by Cecil B. DeMille, DP: George Barnes)
The Ten Commandments (1956, dir by Cecil B. DeMille, DP: Lloyd Griggs)
The Gospel According To St. Matthew (1964, dir by Pier Paolo Pasolini, DP: Tonino Delli Colli)
Jesus Christ Superstar (1973, dir by Norman Jewison, DP; Douglas Slocombe)
What’s an Insomnia File? You know how some times you just can’t get any sleep and, at about three in the morning, you’ll find yourself watching whatever you can find on cable or streaming? This feature is all about those insomnia-inspired discoveries!
If you were having trouble getting to sleep last night, you could have watched 1981’s 300 Miles For Stephanie.
Tony Orlando — yes, the singer — plays Alberto Rodriguez. When the movie begins, Alberto is a rambunctious military veteran who is notorious for drinking too much and getting into fights. After his latest arrest, he is ordered to turn his life around. With the help of his cousin (Edward James Olmos), he gets a job as a cop in San Antonio. Eventually, he gets married and he becomes a father to Stephanie.
When Stephanie is born, Alberto is told that his daughter probably won’t make it to her fifth birthday. The struggle of raising a handicapped daughter becomes too much for Alberto’s wife and soon, Alberto is a single father. When Stephanie makes it to her fifth birthday, Alberto rides a bicycle 300 miles to a chapel so he can give thanks to God. Later, after his story is picked up the San Antonio media, Alberto resolves to run to the chapel, covering 300 miles on foot in just five days.
300 Miles For Stephanie is clearly a made-for-TV movie from the early 80s. It’s the type of movie where every dramatic beat leads to the inevitable fade-out for commercials. The budget is low and there’s not a single subtle moment to be found in the film but the story itself is so touching that it doesn’t matter. Maybe it’s because it’s Holy Week. Maybe it’s because I’ve recently had to say goodbye to people that I loved. Maybe I’m just as sucker for these type of stories. It doesn’t matter. I cried.
As an actor, Tony Orlando was a little stiff but he still brought a likable earnestness to the role and he got good support from Edward James Olmos, Pepe Serna, Gregory Sierra, and Peter Graves. Graves’s role is small but, as Alberto’s captain, he’s exactly the type of fair-minded authority figure who we could use more of nowadays.
It’s a touching film. In real life, Stephanie, who no one expected to see her second birthday, lived to be 26 years old.
1979’s The Teheran Incident opens with a daring theft. A cruise missile with a nuclear warhead is stolen from a Russian military demonstration and somehow transported to pre-Islamic Revolution Iran. (I say somehow because I’m not really sure how one moves a cruise missile from one country to another without anyone noticing.) The plot was masterminded by the Baron (Curd Jurgens), an international criminal who lives on a yacht. With the help of Professor Nikolaeff (John Carradine, making no effort to sound Russian), the Baron plans to use the missile to blow up a conference that’s being held in Iran.
When an American diplomat is murdered after discovering the Baron’s plan, American spy Alec Franklin (Peter Graves) is sent to Teheran to investigate. Alec teams up with KGB agent Konstantine Senyonov (Michael Dante, who makes even less effort than John Carradine to sound or even come remotely across as being Russian). Together, they investigate the Baron’s operations, which means spending a lot of time wandering around Tehran while a “wacka wacka” beat plays in the background. They also spend a lot of time in a casino because all international criminals own a casino. The Baron, I might add, is such a diabolical villain that he actually hides a cruise missile underneath his casino.
The Teheran Incident is an example of what I like to call “James Bond On A Budget.” In the 60s, 70s, and 80s, the Bond films were a big deal and they inspired a slew of imitators. Most of these imitation Bond films were made by people who really couldn’t afford to spend the millions of dollars that went into the Bond films. What’s important though is that they still tried. It’s hard not to appreciate the effort that goes into trying to recreate a luxurious casino without going bankrupt. The film has the ambitions of Las Vegas and the look of Reno and it’s hard not to look at it and say, “Well, at least they tried. They didn’t give up, even if maybe they should have.” Also, as was the case with many of the budget Bonds, the producers were able to get at least Bond veteran to appear in the film. In The Spy Who Loved Me, Curd Jurgens stole a nuclear missile and got shot in the crotch for his trouble. In The Teheran Incident, Curd Jurgens steals a nuclear missile and gets to hang out on a yacht with his mistress and collection of pinch-faced henchmen. Along with both films featuring Jurgens as their main villain, both films also feature a villainous plot that doesn’t really make much sense. But only The Teheran Incident has John Carradine!
As for our heroes, Peter Graves does his job with his usual stoic professionalism while Michael Dante comes across like he’s never even picked up War and Peace, much lest read it. The true star of the film is the disco soundtrack, which is entertainingly out-of-place and impossible to get out of our head.. This is a bad film that you can dance to!
Apparently, the pre-Mullah Iranian government enthusiastically helped with the production of The Teheran Incident, hoping for a popular film that would bring tourists to Iran. Unfortunately, before the film was released, the Iranian government fell to the Islamic Revolution. (I guess it’s a good thing we took care of that cruise missile.) Needless to say, when it was finally released, The Teheran Incident did not do much to help Iranian tourism.
In 1977’s SST: Death Flight, we follow a supersonic jet as it makes it’s maiden flight, going from New York to Paris in just three hours. Not surprisingly, there’s an “all-star” cast waiting for the plane to take off.
Regis Philbin appears as the reporter who breathlessly covers the excitement at the airport. Lorne Greene plays the owner of the jet who is staying behind in New York. Burgess Meredith is the plane’s designer. Robert Reed is the hard-driving pilot. Peter Graves is a businessman who is surprised to see that his former secretary (Season Hubley) has boarded the plane with her stick-in-the-mud fiancé (John De Lancie). Doug McClure is a disgraced pilot who will also be on the flight. Billy Crystal is a bowtie-wearing flight attendant. Bert Convy is the PR man who is traveling with his pregnant mistress (Misty Rowe). Martin Milner, Tina Louise, Susan Strasberg, they’re all on the flight! Finally, there’s a epidemiologist (Brock Peters) who is transporting a box that contains a sample of the Senegal Flu. Now, you might question why anyone would transfer a sample of a highly infectious disease that has a 30% fatality rate on a commercial flight and that’s a good question.
Unfortunately, a disgruntled executive (George Maharis) tries to sabotage the plane, which leads to an explosive decompression that causes the Flu box to burst open. Uh-oh, people are getting sick! And now, Paris refuses to let the plane land in their city because they don’t have time to set up a quarantine. London, however, is willing to let the plane land at one of their airports. However, London hasn’t finalized their quarantine plans so there’s a chance that landing there could lead to British people getting sick.
Brock Peters suggests that they land in Senegal, which already has a quarantine going on. When it is reasonably pointed out that the plane might not have enough fuel to make it to Senegal and that everyone, including those who are not sick, might die in the resulting crash, Martin Milner gives a speech about morality and demands that all of the passengers agree to further risk their lives by going to Senegal. John de Lancie argues for London.
And you know what?
Watching the film, I agreed with John de Lancie. De Lancie points out, quite correctly, the no one on the airplane knew that they were going to be traveling with a deadly disease, that London is preparing a quarantine even while the plane is in flight, and that it’s unfair to demand that everyone on the plane agree to possibly die in a horrific crash. We’re supposed to really hate de Lancie’s character but he makes sense!
The passengers and crew vote 3 to 1 to go to Senegal.
And, of course, the plane crashes.
“Did we do the right thing?” Susan Strasberg asks.
Well, the plane crashed. I think that kind of answers your question.
Some survive and some don’t. The epidemiologist survives without a scratch on him and somehow, no one in the film ever gets mad at him. Seriously, though, what was he thinking bringing his deadly disease samples on a commercial fight!?
Why is this a guilty pleasure? Well, first off, it’s a terrible movie but the cast is full of so many familiar faces that it’s hard to look away. Just the casting of Peter Graves in a “serious” disaster film about an airplane makes this a guilty pleasure. Secondly, the film is the epitome of both the 70s and the disaster genre. The supersonic jet can break the sound barrier but it still looks incredibly tacky. I’m surprised it didn’t have shag carpeting.
Finally, there’s a moment where Bert Convy tells his pregnant girlfriend, “Don’t worry.”
She replies, “That’s what you said last time and look what happened!”
Through the Shattered Lens