Film Review: Winning (dir by James Goldstone)

Posted on January 26, 2026 by Lisa Marie Bowman

In 1969’s Winning, Paul Newman plays a race car driver.

That’s certainly not a surprise. Newman was very much a fan of racing and owned a few race cars himself. In Winning, he looks totally comfortable and believable behind the wheel. There’s not a moment that you look at Paul Newman and think to yourself that he couldn’t be exactly who he’s playing, a very successful and very ambitious race car driver. At its best, the film is a visual love letter to the sport of racing and the thrill of driving fast. When Newman is on that track, Winning is an exciting film.

Unfortunately, Winning doesn’t spend nearly enough time on the track. Instead, we spend way too much time examining the bad marriage of Frank (Paul Newman) and Elora Capua (Joanne Woodward). Frank meets Eulora at a car rental place, where she’s working behind the counter. After a whirlwind romance, they get married and Frank becomes a stepfather to Elora’s annoyingly sensitive son, Charley (Richard Thomas). (The film doesn’t necessarily mean for Charley to be annoying but he most definitely is.) Still, Frank remains obsessed with winning. He remains so obsessed with winning that Elora has an affair with Lou Erding (Robert Wagner), another race car driver. With his marriage in shambles, Frank throws himself into preparing for the Indianapolis 500.

Winning is very much a film of the late 60s. There’s really not much of a story so the film tries to get by on frequent jump cuts, intentionally skewed camera angles, and frequent montages. It’s one of those American films that desperately wants to be mistaken for the type of movies that were coming out of Europe at the time. I tried to count all of the jump cuts during the first few minutes of the film and I quickly gave up. While there’s nothing wrong with a good jump cut, the frequent cuts in Winning feel more like an affectation than anything else. Basically, someone in production said, “The kids like jump cuts so toss them in whether they’re necessary or not.” The film’s attempt to be arty only further serve to remind us that there’s very little actually going on.

Paul Newman had charisma to burn and, in Winning, he looks like he’s enjoying himself whenever he’s behind the wheel. The marriage of Newman and Woodward was one of Hollywood’s great love stories but that doesn’t come across in the marriage for Frank and Elora. A lot of that is because there’s really not much that can be said about who Elora. She’s a blank. Paul Newman had the screen presence and the cool confidence to get away with playing an underwritten character. Woodward, however, can’t overcome the shallow script. (Though Robert Wagner was nowhere near as good an actor as either Newman or Woodward, he has the right look for the role and his stiff line delivery actually works well for the character. For whatever reason, Wagner often seemed to do his best work in Paul Newman films.)

Really, I shouldn’t be surprised that Winning turned out to be stylish but empty. The film was directed by James Goldstone, who also directed the painfully portentous Sidney Poitier-as-Jesus film, Brother John. Eventually, Goldstone straightened up and gave us enjoyably bad films like Rollercoaster and When Time Ran Out. Newman is in When Time Ran Out as well. Just as with Winning, he’s the best thing in the movie. That’s one of the benefits of being one of the great actors. Even when they’re appearing in a less-than-impressive film, you just can’t stop watching them.

Film Review: Hud (dir by Martin Ritt)

Posted on January 26, 2026 by Lisa Marie Bowman

In 1963’s Hud, Paul Newman plays a monster named Hud.

Hud Bannon is the son of rancher Homer Bannon (Melvyn Douglas). Hud lives in a small Texas town, where he’s known for his pink Cadillac, his heavy-drinking, and his womanizing. When we first meet him, he’s leaving the home of a married woman and narrowly escaping the rage of her husband. Throughout the film, he mentions that he’s heading into town to meet “Mrs.” So-and-So. Hud’s father fears that Hud might be incapable of caring about anyone but himself. Hud’s nephew, Lonnie (Brandon deWilde), at first looks up to Hud but, over the course of the film, he comes to see his uncle for who he truly is. Though Hud is quick to defend Homer from others, he himself views Homer with contempt and even plots to have the old man declared incompetent so that he can take over the ranch. His flirtation with the family housekeeper, Alma (Patricia Neal), soon crosses the line into something much more dangerous. Hud is charming and handsome in the way that only a 30-something Paul Newman could be. But he’s also a complete monster.

In Hud, Newman gave one of his best performances and director Martin Ritt and cinematographer James Wong Howe captured some haunting images of the most barren parts of the Texas panhandle. Howe’s black-and-white imagery not only captures the harsh landscape but also the harsh outlook of the people who live there. Hud’s ruthless personality as is much a product of the demands of the land as his own narcissism. The characters in Hud live in a land that doesn’t allow sentimentality. It’s a land that’s allowed Hud to become the monster that he is.

At least, that’s the way that Paul Newman saw Hud. That was also the way that the film’s director, Martin Ritt, viewed Hud. They viewed him as being about as villainous and unlikable as a character could be but, to Newman’s surprise, audiences actually walked out of the film embracing the character and making excuses for him. Newman was shocked to learn that teenagers were putting posters of him as Hud on their walls.

Why did viewers embrace Hud?

Some of it is due to the fact that Brandon deWilde gives a remarkably bland performance as Lonny. We first see Hud through Lonny’s eyes and we are meant to share Lonny’s growing disillusionment with his uncle. But Lonny comes across as being such an empty-headed character that it’s hard to really get emotionally invested in his coming-of-age. When Hud eventually dismisses Lonny and his concerns, Lonny really can’t defend himself because there’s not much going on inside of Lonny. On the other hand, Paul Newman gives such a charismatic performance as Hud that we find ourselves continually making excuses for his bad behavior. When he talks about how he was raised and his difficult relationship with his father, we have sympathy for him even though we know we shouldn’t. The viewer makes excuses for Hud because that’s what we tend to do when it comes to charismatic bad boys who don’t follow the rules.

Indeed, Hud is proof of the power of charisma and screen presence. As a character, Hud does some truly terrible things and yet, because he’s Paul Newman, we want to forgive him. We want to try to figure out why someone who is so handsome and so charismatic would also be so angry. Lonny may be the “good” character but Hud is the one who we want to get to know. When Lonny flips through a paperback to read the sex scenes, he comes across as being creepy. When a drunk Hud flirts with a woman who he has just met, we ask ourselves what we would do if Hud ever tried that with us. The truth is that we all know what we would do. That’s what makes Hud both a dangerous and an intriguing character.

In the end, Hud is an excellent film that features Paul Newman at his best and which uses the downfall of Homer’s ranch as a metaphor for a changing American society. Though Hud was not nominated for Best Picture, it was nominated for almost everything else. Melvyn Douglas and Patricia Neal won acting Oscars. James Wong Howe’s cinematography was also honored. Paul Newman was nominated and perhaps would have won if not for the fact that Sidney Poitier was nominated for playing the exact opposite of Hud in Lilies of the Field. Hud was meant to be a picture about Lonny discovering his uncle was a monster. Instead, the film became about Hud’s refusal to compromise. It turns out that people like good-looking rebels who do what they want.

Even if viewers missed the point, Hud was one of the best films of the early 60s and Paul Newman’s powerful performance continues to intrigue.

Film Review: Paris Blues (dir by Martin Ritt)

Posted on January 26, 2026 by Lisa Marie Bowman

1961’s Paris Blues tells the story of four Americans in Paris.

Ram (Paul Newman) and Eddie (Sidney Poitier) are expatriate jazz musicians. Ram has come to Paris to try to find success as a musician. He’s a little cocky. He’s a little arrogant. However, he’s talented and he believes enough in his talent that he takes it a little bit personally when he’s told that he should just focus on being a composer instead. Eddie is Ram’s best friend and someone who has no interest in ever returning to America. In America, he’s judged by the color of his skin. In Paris, no one cares that he’s black. In Paris, they just care about his talent.

Lillian (Joanne Woodward) and Connie (Diahann Carroll) are best friends who are spending two weeks in Paris. They love jazz and eventually, Lillian comes to love Ram while Connie comes to love Eddie. Connie tries to convince Eddie to marry her and come back to America with her but Eddie tells her that “the struggle” in America is not “my struggle.” Ram also finds himself torn over whether he should stay in Paris or return to America with Lillian. In the end, one man leaves and one man stays. It’s not really much of a surprise who does what.

Paris Blues was directed by Martin Ritt, a director who had been blacklisted during the 50s and whose career was revived by several films that he made with Paul Newman. (Newman and Joanne Woodward first met on the set of Ritt’s The Long Hot Summer.) Ritt was one of those reliably liberal directors who made message films that dealt with political issues but were never quite radical. Paris Blues features a lot of talk about the civil rights movement and it makes an attempt to be honest about why two Americans would chose to live in a different country. And yet, as was so often the case with Martin Ritt’s films, the film presents itself as being far more daring than it actually is. Yes, Ram initially hits on Connie but he loses interest once he sees Lillian. Though the film is based on a novel that featured an interracial relationship, there’s never really any doubt that, in the film, Ram is going to end up with Lillian and Eddie is going to end up with Connie. And while the film makes it clear that Ram and Lillian sleep together within hours of first meeting each other, the relationship between Connie and Eddie is romantic but chaste. Paris Blues may be a mature film for 1961 but it’s still definitely a film of 1961.

That said, the music’s great (Louis Armstrong shows up to jam with Ram and Eddie) and Newman and Woodward’s chemistry is off the charts. Ram is like a lot of the characters that Paul Newman played in the 50s and 60s. He can be self-centered and he can be petulant and he can be self-destructive. But he’s never less than honest and the fact that he refuses to compromise or give into self-doubt makes him very appealing. While Poitier struggles with a script that refuses to allow him too much personality (he’s affably pleasant, even when he’s explaining why he doesn’t want to live in America), Newman dominates the film in the role of an artist determined to share his vision.

Paris Blues is never the masterpiece that it tries to be but Paul Newman makes it more than worth watching.

Guilty Pleasure #100: Ski Patrol (dir by Rich Correll)

Posted on January 26, 2026 by Lisa Marie Bowman

First released in 1990, Ski Patrol is the story of a …. well, a ski patrol.

They’re not a very good ski patrol, not really. Their martinet leader is short and annoying and he’s played by Leslie Jordan. A young George Lopez is a member of the ski patrol and he keeps trying to do stuff that I assume was from his 1990 stand-up act. Future director Paul Feig plays Stanley, who is nerdy but can dance and is willing to dress up like Tina Turner when the Ski Patrol needs to raise some fast money. T.K. Cater is Iceman, who sings at every party and is a part of every prank. Suicide (Sean Sullivan) wears a crazy mask and an evil mask as he debates which dangerous thing he should do. And then there’s Jerry Cramer (Roger Rose), who is handsome and a great skier. He’s technically the hero of the film but he’s kind of smarmy. He does own a cute bulldog, though.

Eccentric or not, the ski patrol is dedicated to Pops (Ray Waltson), the fair-minded and kind-hearted owner of a mountain ski lodge. Unfortunately, an evil developed named Maris (Martin Mull) wants Pops’s land so he and Lance (Corbin Timbrook) and Lance’s evil friends conspire to cause the lodge to fail its annual inspection. Before you know it, mice are running loose, George Lopez is getting thrown in jail, and an avalanche causes a hot dog stands to careen out of control. Since this movie was made in 1990, the solution to all of these problems is to party, party, and party some more!

This is not exactly a good movie. It has its share of cringey moments and jokes that have not aged particularly well. Roger Rose tries to pull off the whole charming smartass routine but he doesn’t really have the screen presence to do it. One gets the feeling that filmmakers may have noticed that while filming because it’s hard not to notice that, despite being the film’s nominal star, Rose doesn’t really do much. And yet, there’s enough odd little moments that the film itself is often more likable than it has any right to be. These scenes might not add up to much but it’s hard not to smile when Paul Feig starts dancing or when Suicide starts arguing with himself. There’s a lot of lovely scenery (the ski lodge really does look like a nice place to visit) and even the bulldog is genuinely cute.

As for T.K. Carter (whose passing earlier this month really didn’t get the attention that it deserved), this film was typical of the majority of the films in which he appeared and, as was often the case, he’s brings a lot of life to material that probably wouldn’t have worked without his energy. Of course, it’s always interesting to see Carter in a silly comedy like this and then to consider his performances in The Thing and Southern Comfort, two excellent films that definitely were not comedies. Indeed, after The Thing, it’s hard not to feel that Carter had earned a chance to appear in a film featuring snow in which everyone survives.

Previous Guilty Pleasures

Join #MondayMania For You May Now Kill The Bride!

Posted on January 26, 2026 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Hi, everyone! Tonight, on twitter, I will be hosting one of my favorite films for #MondayMania! Join us for 2016’s You May Now Kill The Bride!

You can find the movie on Prime and Tubi and then you can join us on twitter at 9 pm central time! (That’s 10 pm for you folks on the East Coast.) See you then!

Song of the Day: Raindrops Keep Fallin’ On My Head, performed by BJ Thomas

Posted on January 26, 2026 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Because today is Paul Newman’s birthday, I figured today’s song of the day should come from one of his films. There’s a tendency amongst some critics to be dismissive of the use of Raindrops Keep Fallin’ On My Head in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and it’s true that it’s not really the type of song that brings to mind robbing trains and dying in South America.

(Though we all know that Butch Cassidy — and maybe the Sundance Kid, too — actually survived and eventually returned to America. We all know that, right?)

But, you know what? It’s a song that really gets stuck in your head and somehow, it just feels appropriate for Paul Newman, an actor whose life wasn’t always happy (his son overdosed in 1976) but who was still almost always described as being one of the nicest guys around. Plus, look at Paul on that bicycle! How can you dislike this song?

4 Shots From 4 Films: Special Paul Newman Edition

Posted on January 26, 2026 by Lisa Marie Bowman

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!

101 years ago today, Paul Newman was born in Shaker Heights, Ohio. He would go on, of course, to become one of America’s greatest film stars, an acclaimed actor who was active from the mid-part of the 20th century to the beginning of our current century. He made his film debut in 1954 with The Silver Chalice (and subsequently paid for an ad in which he apologized for his performance in the film, which I think was a bit unnecessary as he wasn’t really that bad in the film) and he made his final onscreen appearance in 2005 in Empire Falls. (He did, however, subsequently provide the voice of Doc Hudson in Cars, along with narrating a few documentaries.) Time and again, he proved himself to be one of the best actors around. According to most report, he was also one of the nicest. When he died in 2008, the world mourned.

In honor of his cinematic legacy, here are….

4 Shots From 4 Paul Newman Films

The Long Hot Summer (1958, dir by Martin Ritt, DP: Joseph LaShelle)

Hud (1963, dir by Martin Ritt, DP: James Wong Howe)

The Sting (1973, dir by George Roy Hill, DP: Robert Surtees)

Slap Shot (1977, dir by George Roy Hill, DP: Victor Kemper)

Monday Live Tweet Alert: Join Us For Assassin!

Posted on January 26, 2026 by Lisa Marie Bowman

As some of our regular readers undoubtedly know, I am involved in hosting a few weekly live tweets on twitter and occasionally Mastodon. I host #FridayNightFlix every Friday, I co-host #ScarySocial on Saturday, and I am one of the five hosts of Mastodon’s #MondayActionMovie ! Every week, we get together. We watch a movie. We snark our way through it.

Tonight, for #MondayActionMovie, the film will be 1986’s Assassin!

It should make for a night of fun viewing and I invite all of you to join in. If you want to join the live tweets, just hop onto Mastodon, find the movie on YouTube and hit play at 8 pm et, and use the #MondayActionMovie hashtag! The watch party community is a friendly group and welcoming of newcomers so don’t be shy.

See you soon!

4 Shots From 4 Films: Special Tobe Hooper Edition

Posted on January 25, 2026 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Today, on what would have been his 83rd birthday, the Shattered Lens pays tribute to Texas’s own, Tobe Hooper!

The Austin hippie who redefined horror and left thousands of yankees terrified of driving through South Texas, Tobe Hooper often struggled to duplicate both the critical and the box office success of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. It’s only been in the years since his death that many critics and viewers have come to truly appreciate his unique and subversive vision.

Down here, in Texas, we always believed in him.

It’s time for….

4 Shots From 4 Tobe Hooper Films

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974, dir by Tobe Hooper, DP: Daniel Pearl)

Eaten Alive (1976, dir by Tobe Hooper. DP: Robert Caramico)

The Funhouse (1981, dir by Tobe Hooper. DP: Andrew Laszlo)

Poltergeist (1982, dir by Tobe Hooper, DP: Matthew Leonetti)

Brad reviews BUMP IN THE NIGHT (1991), starring Meredith Baxter Birney, Wings Hauser & Christopher Reeve!

Posted on January 24, 2026 by Bradley Crain

My wife and I are iced and snowed in here in Central Arkansas this weekend, so we’re watching movies. I was browsing Tubi when I came across the 1991 made-for-TV movie BUMP IN THE NIGHT. Knowing nothing about the film other than the fact that Christopher Reeve is prominently featured on the poster, I hit play and got a movie I really wasn’t prepared for, emotionally or morally!

The film opens with a young schoolboy named Jonathan (Corey Carrier) leaving his home, where his alcoholic mother Martha (Meredith Baxter Birney) is passed out on the couch. Jonathan is on his way to have breakfast with his dad Patrick (Wings Hauser). Rather than finding his dad, however, he’s met by the mysterious Lawrence Muller (Christopher Reeve) who claims he was sent by his dad to pick him up. When Patrick and Martha, divorced well before the opening of the film, discover that Jonathan is missing, the two must try to put aside their differences to find their son, who’s been targeted by both a pornographer and a pedophile.

We’ve been watching a lot of made-for-TV thrillers around my house lately that deal with people with various psychological issues, but I was not expecting a film that dealt with child pornography and pedophilia. And I certainly wasn’t expecting that pedophile to be played by Christopher Reeve. Reeve gives an effective and chilling performance, as his character starts out as kind and soft spoken to the boy, before eventually showing himself to be violent and emotionally unstable as he’s rejected and the walls start closing in on him. Meredith Baxter Birney and Wings Hauser are also effective as the divorced couple who carry a lot of emotional baggage, but try to put that aside while they’re looking for their son. Birney is especially good as she’s an alcoholic, and we see her fighting her own personal demons throughout the search. Hauser, who’s always so good when he plays the psycho in his movies, gets the straight role as the concerned dad and he brings a needed calm and steadying presence to the explosive material.

You have to give BUMP IN THE NIGHT some credit for tackling some very difficult material, whether it be alcoholism, pornography or pedohilia, and it takes them head on. Based on the 1988 novel of the same name from author Isabelle Holland, there are limits to how far this TV production can take the material, but in some ways those limits make the film even more disturbing. We see bedrooms with multiple cameras set up for recording illicit activities with children. We see grainy VHS tapes from pornographers that show young boys holding hands and walking down the street. We’re told things like, “just make sure he’s ready for filming! It begins at 10:00!” Director Karen Arthur uses these types of images and thoughts to manipulate our emotions, with our own minds filling in the blanks with the worst fears that we can imagine. This gave me a strong rooting interest for the local law enforcement and parents to rescue their son before he’s exploited and abused.

Even with its excellent cast, I may not have watched BUMP IN THE NIGHT if I had realized the sordid nature of the material. I’ll be honest, with its title, I was expecting a more straightforward thriller. However, having now seen the film, I will give it credit for its effective handling of the material and its fine performances. I won’t ever watch it again though.