Skip to main content

You’re even more beautiful in person than you are in real life.

After the Fox
(1966)

(SPOILERS) I’ve always liked After the Fox, from when I first saw it as a youngster, in thrall to its catnip Burt Bacharach score while simultaneously perplexed by its final reveal. It has to be admitted, though, that it perhaps isn’t quite as funny as it might have been. And further, that it may have been a bit too clever to have stood a chance of garnering another The Pink Panther (1963) size hit for Peter Sellers (it came complete with animated-animal titles and potential hit single from The Hollies that failed to chart). Taking shots at Fellini movies simply isn’t the kind of thing that engenders mass-audience raves.

The Fox: If only I could steal enough to become an honest man.

Because, for a movie about a brilliant master thief, Neil Simon’s screenplay spends very little time on how brilliant he is, or indeed riffing on criminal tropes. It’s far more concerned with sending up the vanity of the movie industry, its seductiveness and affinity for pseudish self-regard. It was purportedly the latter element that attracted legendary The Bicycle Thieves (1948) director Vittorio De Sica, an unlikely choice on the face of things. Simon set out to target the art-house movie, and if Sellers involvement – Simon favoured a genuine Italian actor – turned it into a different beast, it also brought De Sica. If the collaboration was a less than joyous one, that shouldn’t be entirely surprising; Sellers, fuelled by several big hits and accompanying critical raves, was very much the prima donna by this stage (most conspicuously leading to his firing from the following year's Casino Royale).

Tony Powell: What’s neo-realism?
Harry Granoff: No money.

While these moviemaking sequences are amusing, they’re rarely uproariously funny, aside from Victor Mature’s winningly self-effacing turn as an unaware, baffled and dense over-the-hill, “internationally handsome” Hollywood star Tony Powell (who wears his trademark trench coat in every movie). One can readily appreciate the inanity of art cinema as summoned by Sellers’ Aldo Vanucci, posing as a neo-realist director Frederico Fabrizi (uh-huh) in order to facilitate smuggling the stolen Gold of Cairo into Italy, casting his sister (Britt Ekland) as the leading lady and desperately improvising motivation and plot to Powell: “No matter how fast you run, you can never run away from yourself!” To which Powell responds with an enthusiastically indiscriminate “It’s beautiful!

Vanucci: In films either you have got a face or you don’t got a face. You have got a face.

But much of the accompanying wash of eagerly dupable locals, dazzled at the thought of being stars of a real movie, is a little lacking. Lando Buzzanca makes an impression as the hapless town police chief, similarly seduced and incessantly practising his solitary line of “Good morning!” (Buzzanca would appear in another English-language comedy a few years later, essaying one of Monte Carlo or Bust’s stereotype sex-mad Italians). Martin Balsam is the solitary rock of sanity as Powell’s manager, who knows something’s very wrong with this picture but is unable to convince his star of the same. There’s also amusement to be had when the shockingly inept footage is shown in court; a film critic leaps to its defence, claiming it “A work of art! I cried, I cried! It’s the greatest film to come out of Italy in forty years!

The consequence, however, is that the most enjoyably comedic parts of the movie come during the early stages, when Sellers gets to dress up and assume a variety of roles, from policeman to priest, his excursions accompanied by Bacharach’s delirious score. His early scenes of incarceration, which include the novel conceit of giving his visiting friends and family difficult-to-obtain desirables, finds Aldo offered respect from fellow inmates in the manner of Noel Coward in The Italian Job (1969) a couple of years later; it’s a wonder he was never tempted to do a Godfather spoof.

There are also laughs to be had at the suspiciously over-protective brother trope, with Aldo continually putting his foot in it in his attempts to keep Gina on the straight and narrow. This extends to his dalliance with the extraordinarily pulchritudinous Maria Grazia Buccella, going rather splendidly until Aldo discovers she is the sister of his business partner Okra (Akim Tamiroff). The most memorable sequence involving the two finds Aldo making a play for Buccella while the words coming from her mouth are those of Okra (he is seated behind her, in aid of an “inconspicuous” meet). This would be riffed on by Mike Myers in Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002), with Nathan Lane and Beyoncé Knowles.

Vanucci: When I give you the signal, do nothing, absolutely nothing.

It’s possible that After the Fox’s director wasn’t the man to mine the material’s comic potential to the max. Simon opined that De Sica’s editors didn’t understand the jokes, and that even recut, many funny moments were lost. Certainly, revisiting the final scene with Sellers at his most post-modern (or conversely, Goonish), what strikes me now is not the absurdity, but that the timing is off. As if he told De Sica his notion, and Di Sica didn’t really understand but let him run with it. Much as I appreciate the puncturing of Fellini et al, I can’t help think the movie After the Fox was sold as, with its daring cartoon fox bank robber and exaggerated Frazetti poster design, would have been a much funnier one.



Popular posts from this blog

You were this amazing occidental samurai.

Ricochet (1991) (SPOILERS) You have to wonder at Denzel Washington’s agent at this point in the actor’s career. He’d recently won his first Oscar for Glory , yet followed it with less-than-glorious heart-transplant ghost comedy Heart Condition (Bob Hoskins’ racist cop receives Washington’s dead lawyer’s ticker; a recipe for hijinks!) Not long after, he dipped his tentative toe in the action arena with this Joel Silver production; Denzel has made his share of action fare since, of course, most of it serviceable if unremarkable, but none of it comes near to delivering the schlocky excesses of Ricochet , a movie at once ingenious and risible in its plot permutations, performances and production profligacy.

He’ll regret it to his dying day, if ever he lives that long.

The Quiet Man (1952) (SPOILERS) The John Wayne & John Ford film for those who don’t like John Wayne & John Ford films? The Quiet Man takes its cues from Ford’s earlier How Green Was My Valley in terms of, well less Anglophile and Hibernophile and Cambrophile nostalgia respectively for past times, climes and heritage, as Wayne’s pugilist returns to his family seat and stirs up a hot bed of emotions, not least with Maureen O’Hara’s red-headed hothead. The result is a very likeable movie, for all its inculcated Oirishness and studied eccentricity.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Well, something’s broke on your daddy’s spaceship.

Apollo 13 (1995) (SPOILERS) The NASA propaganda movie to end all NASA propaganda movies. Their original conception of the perilous Apollo 13 mission deserves due credit in itself; what better way to bolster waning interest in slightly naff perambulations around a TV studio than to manufacture a crisis event, one emphasising the absurd fragility of the alleged non-terrestrial excursions and the indomitable force that is “science” in achieving them? Apollo 13 the lunar mission was tailor made for Apollo 13 the movie version – make believe the make-believe – and who could have been better to lead this fantasy ride than Guantanamo Hanks at his all-American popularity peak?

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

You think a monkey knows he’s sitting on top of a rocket that might explode?

The Right Stuff (1983) (SPOILERS) While it certainly more than fulfils the function of a NASA-propaganda picture – as in, it affirms the legitimacy of their activities – The Right Stuff escapes the designation of rote testament reserved for Ron Howard’s later Apollo 13 . Partly because it has such a distinctive personality and attitude. Partly too because of the way it has found its through line, which isn’t so much the “wow” of the Space Race and those picked to be a part of it as it is the personification of that titular quality in someone who wasn’t even in the Mercury programme: Chuck Yaeger (Sam Shephard). I was captivated by The Right Stuff when I first saw it, and even now, with the benefit of knowing-NASA-better – not that the movie is exactly extolling its virtues from the rooftops anyway – I consider it something of a masterpiece, an interrogation of legends that both builds them and tears them down. The latter aspect doubtless not NASA approved.

Drank the red. Good for you.

Morbius (2022) (SPOILERS) Generic isn’t necessarily a slur. Not if, by implication, it’s suggestive of the kind of movie made twenty years ago, when the alternative is the kind of super-woke content Disney currently prioritises. Unfortunately, after a reasonable first hour, Morbius descends so resignedly into such unmoderated formula that you’re left with a too-clear image of Sony’s Spider-Verse when it lacks a larger-than-life performer (Tom Hardy, for example) at the centre of any given vehicle.

He doesn’t want to lead you. He just wants you to follow.

Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore (2022) (SPOILERS) The general failing of the prequel concept is a fairly self-evident one; it’s spurred by the desire to cash in, rather than to tell a story. This is why so few prequels, in any form, are worth the viewer/reader/listener’s time, in and of themselves. At best, they tend to be something of a well-rehearsed fait accompli. In the movie medium, even when there is material that withstands closer inspection (the Star Wars prequels; The Hobbit , if you like), the execution ends up botched. With Fantastic Beasts , there was never a whiff of such lofty purpose, and each subsequent sequel to the first prequel has succeeded only in drawing attention to its prosaic function: keeping franchise flag flying, even at half-mast. Hence Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore , belatedly arriving after twice the envisaged gap between instalments and course-correcting none of the problems present in The Crimes of Grindelwald .

So, you’re telling me that NASA is going to kill the President of the United States with an earthquake?

Conspiracy Theory (1997) (SPOILERS) Mel Gibson’s official rehabilitation occurred with the announcement of 2016’s Oscar nominations, when Hacksaw Ridge garnered six nods, including Mel as director. Obviously, many refuse to be persuaded that there’s any legitimate atonement for the things someone says. They probably weren’t even convinced by Mel’s appearance in Daddy’s Home 2 , an act of abject obeisance if ever there was one. In other circles, though, Gibbo, or Mad Mel, is venerated as a saviour unsullied by the depraved Hollywood machine, one of the brave few who would not allow them to take his freedom. Or at least, his values. Of course, that’s frequently based on alleged comments he made, ones it’s highly likely he didn’t. But doesn’t that rather appeal to the premise of his 23-year-old star vehicle Conspiracy Theory , in which “ A good conspiracy theory is an unproveable one ”?

You’d be surprised how many intersectional planes of untethered consciousness exist.

Moon Knight (2022) (SPOILERS) Now, this is an interesting one. Not because it’s very good – Phase IV MCU? Hah! – but because it presents its angle on the “superhero” ethos in an almost entirely unexpurgated, unsoftened way. Here is a character explicitly formed through the procedures utilised by trauma-based mind control, who has developed alters – of which he has been, and some of which he remains, unaware – and undergone training/employment in the military and private mercenary sectors (common for MKUltra candidates, per Dave McGowan’s Programmed to Kill ). And then, he’s possessed by what he believes to be a god in order to carry out acts of extreme violence. So just the sort of thing that’s good, family, DisneyPlus+ viewing.