Newspaper Page Text
PAGE 6—December 6,1973
TV Movies
SUNDAY, DECEMBER 9 — 8:30 p.m.
(ABC) -- THE BROTHERHOOD (1968) --
This story about the Mafia deals with the
Ginetta brothers, Frank (Kirk Douglas), a
slightly middle-aged syndicate boss
specializing in the confidence game, and
Vince (Alex Cord), his younger
college-graduate brother who wants to keep
the syndicate’s books but also keep his hands
out of their sordid dealings. Frank is the old
school hood, hesitating to break into' the
lucrative field of legitimate-business
takeovers; Vince is the new breed, eager to
cloak the syndicate’s operation under the
cover of respectability. Naturally, a rift
develops between the two, opening the way
for director Martin Ritt’s clever dissection of
an unusual kind of generation gap. The action
and outcome are predictable, the characters
somewhat familiar, but the film as a whole is
interesting and engaging under Ritt’s expert
direction and with Douglas’fine acting (A-lll)
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 11 — 8:30 p.m.
(ABC) -- THE CAT CREATURE -
Made-for-TV. Meredith Baxter, Stuart
Whitman are some of the humanoids in this
horror-thriller.
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 12 — 8:30
p.m. (ABC) -- MESSAGE TO MY
DAUGHTER -- TV film with Bonnie Bedelia,
Martin Sheen, Kitty Wynn. Program details
not available at press time, BUT the cast is
impressive. So, take a chance until the first
aspirin commercial?
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 13—9:00p.m.
(CBS) -- THE LAST ESCAPE (1970) - This
rather simple World War II story involves an
Allied attempt to smuggle a famous rocket
scientist out of Germany while the Russians
are trying to do the same. Stuart Whitman
leads the operation through dark alleys, across
war-scarred fields and past German camps
toward the American offensive lines, with the
Germans foiling all their escape attempts and
the Russians in hot pursuit. The bland acting
is covered by plenty of action: explosions,
gun battles and chases, with remarkably little
blood shown on screen. Several brutal battle
encounters, however, make this unsuitable for
small children. (A-ll)
FRIDAY, DECEMBER 14 — 10:00 p.m.
(ABC) - PORTRAIT: LEGEND IN
GRANITE - One-hour biographical film
dramatizes the life of Vince Lombardi,
recognized, via his record with the Green Bay
Packers and later with a “developing”
Washington Redskin team, as one of the finest
- and toughest - football coaches of all time.
Ernest Borgnine is an amazing look-alike for
the late coach, right down to the rumpled
baseball cap and the famous menacing grin
that were Lombardi’s on-the-field trademarks.
As a quality TV biog, this one rates
first-and-ten.
SATURDAY, DECEMBER 15 — 9:00 p.m.
(NBC) - HOTEL (1967) - Hotel, Airport -
what difference does it make? Here, a New
Orleans hotel famous for its old-fashioned
hospitality provides the location for the
dramatic events in the lives of some people
who are staying there. The main plot concerns
the hotel’s failure to combine efficiency and
tradition when faced with the pressures of
insufficient income and the unethical tactics
used by a chain operator obsessed with the
idea of owning it. Richard Quine directed this
melodrama of the old school (based on
Arthur Hailey’s best-seller) in color and with
emphasis on providing adult entertainment.
Among the large cast (Rod Taylor, Kevin
McCarthy, Merle Oberon, Michael Rennie,
Richard Conte, Catherine Spaak), Melvyn
Douglas as the aristocratic hotel owner and
Karl Malden as a sneak thief stand out in
every scene in which they appear. (A-lll)
Will, //>
oooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Film Classifications
A — Section I — Morally Unobjectionable for General Patronage
A — Section II — Morally Unobjectionable for Adults, Adolescents
A — Section HI — Morally Unobjectionable for Adults
A — Section IV — Morally Unobjectionable for Adults, Reservations
B - Morally Objectionable in Part for All
C — Condemned
OOOOOOOO'OOOOOOOQCiD
//^///////// /1 I '
George Pan Cosmatos, worked with Robert
Katz on the script and they have fashioned a
troubling film which, whatever its historical
inaccuracies, introduces issues of moral
responsibility for war-time actions that
deserve a mature viewer’s thoughtful
consideration. (A-lll)
DAY FOR NIGHT (Warners) French
director Francois Truffaut extneds his love
affair with movie-making into a movie about
making movies. The idea is (a) to have fun, on
both sides of the camera, and (b) to show
how the best-laid plans of mice and and movie
directors go oft awry-as the film follows the
topsy-turvy events surrouding the cast and
crew of a company making a French
soap-opera at a Riviera location. Truffaut
plays the director of the film-within-the-film,
and Jacqueline Bisset, Jean-Pierre Leaud,
Jean-Pierre Aumond, and Valentina Cortese
are his movie’s movie stars. The fun in the
movie comes in watching how reality keeps
intruding on the film-makers-in the form of a
mishap here, a small tragedy there, each
making the movie company scramble
schedules and revise plot lines. It is a highly
delightful experience for film buffs, especially
those who’ve followed Truffaut’s career; and
for people out for an evening’s entertainment,
DAY FOR NIGHT offers something well
worth the admission price. (A-lll)
BREEZY (Universal) Granted the
traditional feminine appeal of the soap opera,
no film that puts it to the fantasy life of the
American male can be all bad, and Clint
Eastwood’s new movie (he directs) manages
this with such disarming conviction that one
can’t help but wonder if he’s realty funning us
or not. It is all deadly serious-this
May-December romance that has William
Holden, as a divorced 50-year-old L.A. real
estate broker, staid, affluent and insensitive in
his Laurel Canyon mansion, find, one
morning 17-year-old Breezy (Kay Lenz) on
his doorstep, she a free-spirited member of
the unwashed counter-culture just aching to
reopen his eyes to life’s possibilities. Despite
himself and the obvious disparities in age and
life style, not to mention old wounds opened
up by his ex-wife (Joan Hotchkis), Holden
allows himself to be egged on by a
disillusioned, henpecked, middle-aged friend
(Roger Carmel). Much to his own surprise, he
is soon romping on bed and beach with
Breezy, and has, by gosh, thrown his
misgivings to the winds . . .until, of course, he
meets her friends and she his. He breaks it off
(why didn’t the movie end there?) but it’s
lonely in Laurel Canyon with only Sir
Love-A-Lot, the mutt Breezy couldn’t let die,
for company; and besides, the sudden death
of the husband of an old girl friend convinces
him of the preciousness, not to say transience
of all things human. And so . ...Eastwood’s
sudsy story and approach is so transparent,
his plot devices so deliciously guideless that
the film’s patent amorality is an innocuous as
it is irrelevant to human experience. This is,
traditionally, the stuff soap opera is made of.
The film’s frequent use of nudity and
pointless profanity is, therefore, all the more
out of place.
MASSACRE IN ROME (Natl.
Genl.) . . .Mystery still shrouds wartime event.
On March 23, 1944, Italian partisans
attacked a column of SS police troops
marching through the center of Rome and
killed 33 of them. Within 24 hours, 335
Italians were dead, executed in reprisal on the
direct orders of Hitler. These victims of the
war, most guilty of nothing but their
nationality, were marched into the Ardeatine
caves that nestle among the catacombs of the
Appian Way and each killed with a single shot
through the head.
It was impossible, of course, to keep an
operation of this size hidden and, when the
Allies liberated Rome a few months later, the
caves were opened and became a national
shrine. Lengthy trials were held and many of
the participants were brought to account.
And yet this massacre continues to pose
questions about why it happened at all and
who was ultimately responsible.
This movie concerns itself only with the
tragedy of those two days in March 30 years
ago. But unlike the ordinary war film,
interested simply in the actions of
black-and-white characters, this one is more
concerned with getting at the moral issues
arising from the event. Consequently, great
care is given to each small detail so that a
complete picture emerges as to the characters
and their motivation. The movie succeeds
particularly well in setting up its specific
moment in history so that the pressures
operating on each character become
understandable.
The German response to this attack was a
classic example of institutional bureaucracy
which, once started, almost runs itself. Under
the Hague Convention, civilians could be
executed in reprisals for military attacks.
What complicates the legality of this
particular reprisal is that Italy was technically
at war with Germany and that the partisans
regarded themselves as military units. From
the moment that Hitler gave the order for the
reprisal in a ten-to-one ratio, the Germans in
command of Rome tried to find ways to
mitigate the number or extend the time limit
beyond 24 hours. They knew Rome would be
free within weeks and wished to keep their
hands as clean as possible. The main point
here is that the tragedy could have been
avoided if enough people within the system
had refused to carry out the orders. The film
shows how the military simply passed on
Hilter’s orders without taking any
responsibility for them.
In the context of that particular time, the
preoccupation of the Vatican in regard to
Rome was how to insure an orderly and
non-destructive transition of power from the
German forces to those of the Allies. Vatican
policy was to avert all partisan activity which
might provoke the Germans into turning the
city into a battleground. As implied in the
film Pope Paul XII had full knowledge of the
planned reprisals but refused, essentially for
political reasons, to intervene. Historians with
access to the Vatican archives of the period
dispute this interpretation, particularly in
light of the statements of an SS officer, whose
superior was the highest ranking SS general in
Rome at the time and whose office was
charged with passing on information to the
Vatican, that he himself had no knowledge of
the retaliations until after Hitler's orders were
carried out. In fairness to Robert Katz, the
author of the book on which the film is
based, it must be stated that Katz claims to
have sought access to Vatican archives and
was refused. More to the point, perhaps, is the
film’s misreading of the Vatican’s ability to
influence German actions at a time when the
papacy had much less voice in international
affairs than it does today.
Among the names of those who died in the
caves is that of Father Pietro Pappagallo. In
the film he is made a central character who
learns of the impending reprisals, tries to get
the Vatican to stop them, and finally offers
himself as one of the victims, somewhat like
the Polish concentration camp martyr, Father
Kolbe. The character is a bit extraneous to
the point of the film but as played by
Marcello Mastroianni' he has a very
sympathetic role and one that is used to
clarify dramatically some of the background
material.
The film’s real center of attention is
Colonel Kappler, the Gestapo officer who
carried out the executions. As played by
Richard Eurton he is a somewhat complicated
character who tries to avoid the catastrophe
but then accepts the task as his fate. He is a
technician, intelligent but emotionally
crippled.
MASSACRE IN ROME is a provocative
film which avoids, for the most part, the easy
oversimplifications of war films. The director,
EXECUTIVE ACTION (National General)
is a curiously antispetic film based on the
festering controversy surrounding the
assassination of President John F. Kennedy in
Dallas, November 22, 1963. In the words of
television news commentator Eric Sevareid,
the notion that an impeccably executed
conspiracy, rather than Lee Harvey Oswald
acting alone, killed the President is a
“cherished illusion” of many in this nation.
The belief seems somewhat more than
cherished in the minds of Donald Freed and
Mark Lane (story), Dalton Trumbo (script),
Edward Lewis (production) and David Miller
(direction), for their film is so confident in its
manifest truth-as a handful of right-wing
millionaries plot to kill Kennedy and get the
job done with the unwitting aid of “patsy”
Oswald-that it neglects to offer any coherent,
convincing demonstration of its thesis.
Perhaps budget was the main problem, for
whereas the film sports a name cast that
includes Burt Lancaster, the late Robert
Ryan, and Will Geer, the actors give the
impression of having worked on a one-take
schedule—which is not at all enhanced by the
editing or photography that employs many
actual news clips of Kennedy woven
awkwardly into the fictional segments. The
result is a very static film, which presumably
intends to jar dozing American awake to the
true horror between the lines of the Warren
Commission report. EXECUTIVE ACTION is
disturbing only in its inability to stir even
pathos for the fallen President. The
film-maker’s crassness in scheduling its release
to coincide to the month with the tenth
anniversary .of the President’s assassination is
regrettable. (A-lll)
YOUNG PEOPLE IN THE NEWS -- Two members of St. Matthew’s
Parish, Dix Hills, N.Y., are among national first prize winners of 1973
Kodak Teenage Movie Awards. They are Donna Santore (left) and Barbara
Scarlato (third from left). They and Caryn Nadworny confer with teacher
Mrs. Mary Blake, in her car. Mrs. Blake is a member of Sacred Heart
parish, Bayside, Queens. The teenagers attend Candlewood Junior High
School. In the right photo Terry Points, 21, a graduate of John Carroll
High School in Birmingham, Ala., is congratulated by Gov. George Wallace
after being named the first black homecoming queen at the University of
Alabama in Tuscaloosa. (NC Photos)
BOOK REVIEWS
G.K. Chesterton: A Biography, by
Dudley Barker, Stein and Day, N.Y.,
1973, 304 pp., $8.95. Reviewed by
Father Joseph Gallagher
(NC News Service)
Although Gilbert Keith Chesterton
(1874-1936) wrote a weekly column for
the Illustrated London News for more
than 31 years, he made a point of never
asking for a raise from that journal.
“That paper gave me a regular income
when I needed it badly. I shall always be
grateful.”
Dogged gratitude was arguably the
key characteristic of this extraordinary
essayist, debater, novelist, playwright,
broadcaster, versifier, biographer,
Catholic convert and apologist, and (as
Father Brown’s creator) detective story
writer.
He was grateful for existence, which
perpetually astonished him. He was
grateful for his fragile wife, Frances; and
for his many friends - famous ones like
Hilaire Belloc and Maurice Baring; and
countless, delightfully unfamous ones;
grateful too for friendly enemies like
George Bernard Shaw; grateful for his
native England and its tradition of
respect for the common man -- of such
he sang in his greatest poem, “The
Ballad of the White Horse.”
I first encountered him three decades
ago in high school literature books.
Later, on my own, I delighted in such
books of essays as “Orthodoxy” and
“The Everlasting Man.” I was inspired
by his biographies of Francis of Assisi
r
and Thomas Aquinas, noting the
glowing praise accorded the latter by
the erudite Thomist philosopher,
Etienne Gilson.
In brief, I encountered him when, for >
various reasons that he would have
Understood, I “needed him badly. I shall
always be grateful.” I was grateful for
Maisie Ward’s indispensable biography
of him, and am happy to have the
chance to recommend this latest study,
by a non-Catholic British authority on
the Chesterton period.
Barker, who judges GKC to have been
the best-natured of men and one of the
language’s most prolific writers, traces
his subject through a happy childhood
into lonely, awkward school years - he
had trouble learning to read! - into late
adolescent years in an art school during
which he underwent a prolonged period
of inner torment. As guessed at by the
author, this torment had a sexual and
diabolic coloration for the introspective
Chesteron. (According to his mother, a
medical specialist told her that her son
had the largest and most sensitive brain
he had ever come across.)
He survived this hellish time, finding
in his gratitude for existence and in his
belief in the ultimate decency of things
exuberant inspiration for his future
writings. But first he worked for several
years as a reader in publishing
companies, earning as little as one
pound a week.
Needing money for marriage, he
virtually stumbled into his writing
career by dashing off articles on various
literary and political subjects - articles
which dazzled all kinds of readers and
established his reputation quickly.
His gift for aphorisms and the
crackling paradox soon became evident
- “Life is a wonderful place for a battle,
but a terrible place for a truce;” “A
madman is someone who has lost
everything but his reason;” “When you
look at something for the hundredth
time you are in danger of seeing it for
the first time.”
His biographies of men like Robert
Browning and Charles Dickens revealed
what Barker sees as GK’s greatest
critical gift: “the ability to express in
one or two concise statements the
essential of a writer.”
Granting that the tall, immense
Chesterton with his high-pitched voice
was not the most captivating of
lecturers, Barker agrees with the original
audiences that he was “as sharp,
vigorous and swift a debater as any man
alive.” And he took on the giants -
Clarence Darrow, Bertrand Russell,
George Bernard Shaw. When a youthful
questioner insisted that he had no proof
of his own existence, only an intuition,
Chesterton instantly advised: “Cherish
it, my son, cherish it.”
Always a religious man after his
youthful agnosticism, Chesterton was
48 when he became a Catholic. He took
instructions from the illustrious Msgr.
Ronald Knox. From the illustrious
Shaw he received the comment: “This is
going too far.”
For Barker, the central fact about his
subject is that at the birth of the 20th
century, decades before he became a
Catholic, Chesterton had come to
accept the beliefs of orthodox
Christianity as true.
Chesterton was too vital a man, too
real and passionate, not to have had his
warts. He was untidy, drank too much,
ate too carelessly. He was perhaps too
much the dreamy pre-industrialist in his
political theories, and excessively
devoted to his controversial brother,
Cecil. Like Churchill himself, he saw
more good in the pre-war Mussolini than
later events would justify.
Most regrettably -- though I found
Barker’s treatment of this whole
problem unsatisfactory - Chesterton’s
largemindedness and largeheartedness
seem to have failed him curiously in the
matter of anti-Semitism. GK’s own
words come to mind here: “The ugliness
of evil consists in the fact that it can
attract decent people, not in the fact
that it can’t.
And the gifted Chesterton was surely
one of the most decent of men. When
he died of heart and kidney
complications in 1936, he left many a
decent man bereft. His words and their
timeless, praiseful attitude toward the
miracle of existence are still putting
men happily in his debt. Through
Barker’s study, may that tribe increase.
(Father Gallagher teaches preaching
and literary subjects at Baltimore’s St.
Mary’s Seminary and University.)
(•
ft V LIFE IIS MUSIC
BY THE DAMEANS
I Won’t Last A Day Without You
Day after day, I must face a world of strangers where
I don’t belong, I’m not that strong.
It’s nice to know that there’s someone I can turn to
who will always care, you’re always there.
So many times when the city seems to be without a
friendly face, it’s a lonely place.
It’s nice to know that you’ll be there if I need you and
you’ll always smile, it’s all worthwhile.
When there’s no getting over that rainbow,
when my smallest of dreams won’t come true,
I can take all the madness the world has to give,
But I won’t last a day without you.
Touch me and I end up singing, troubles seem to up
and disappear.
You touch me with the love you’re bringing
I can’t really lose when you’re near,
When you’re near my love.
If all my friends have forgotten half their promises
They’re not unkind, just hard to find.
One look at you and I know that I could learn to live
without the rest, I’ve found the best.
(c) 20th Century Records
Paul Williams - Roger Nichols.
Last year the movie “The Poseidon Adventure” made quite a hit all over the
country. However, it wasn’t until this past summer that the theme song of that
movie, “There’s Got to be a Morning After,” rose to the top of the charts and it
was Maureen McGovern who contributed to making it so popular. With its
hopeful sound and promise of a morning after, many people could certainly
relate to its message.
Ms. McGovern now has a second cut from that album, “The Morning After,”
released as a single and again its hopeful note is touching people where they are
in life. It is a song of friendship and was earlier performed by the Carpenters on
their album, “Song for You.”
S
The song, “I Won’t Last a Day Without You,” can certainly bring out
different emotions depending on the quality of friendships we have shared. If we
have known a person like this song talks about, then the feeling of thankfulness
and appreciation can swell up within us. If we are lonely and have never had a
friend who fulfills those needs within us, then our reaction could be one of
longing or even a slight tinge of unreality that such a person could ever exist for
us. Whatever our personal experience might be with regard to friends, this song
can surely prompt deeper thought.
I’m sure you’ve heard the cliche, “you can know a person by the friends that
he or she has.” Whether or not we buy this saying completely, we do have to
admit that our friends in some way complement or complete our personalities or
needs. Let us look at some of the qualities of a friend as the above song
expresses. One important aspect of a friend is that they inspire us so that
whenever they “touch me . . .1 end up singing.” This is the person who truly
transforms us to the extent that when we are with them, we feel an uplift
which tells that life is worth it. Also a friend is the type of individual who can
help us in time of difficulty and worry and because of their presence our
“troubles seem to up and disappear.” This doesn’t mean that they are there to
solve our problems. Sometimes just listening, understanding, and caring can help
ease the pain of suffering and anxiety. A third quality of a friend (and this one is
tremendously important) is that the person brings out the best in us and because
of this, gives us the confidence that “I can’t really lose when you’re near.” We
have all been around people who drag us down and even make us feel like we
have no dignity as an individual. With these people, we end up with a bad
attitude about life, about ourselves and about others, and thus real growth is
impaired. On the other hand the right type of people can be vehicles for personal
growth, freeing us to be who we can be.
We have primarily talked about receiving friendship but we must also think
about whether we fulfill these dualities of friendshiD to others. Judy Collins in
her song, “Song for Judith,” has the thought, “I’d like to be as good a friend
to you as you are to me,” and this should certainly be our approach to those
who offer their love to us.
If we can make these qualities of friendship a reality then life can take on real
purpose and meaning. We will be able to “face that world of strangers” and all
the “madness the world has to give” with someone who cares and makes it “all
worthwhile.”
All correspondence should be directed to: The Dameans; St. Joseph’s Church; 216 Patton
Ave.; P.O. Box 5188; Shreveport, LA. 71105.)