ONE FROM THE HEART (1981)


Directed By: Francis Ford Coopola

Written By: Francis Ford Coopola,

Armyan Bernstein and Luana Anders 

Story By: Armyan Bernstein

Cinematography: Vittorio Storaro and Ronald V. Garcia

Editor: Rudi Fehr, Anne Goursaud and Randy

Roberts

Cast: Frederic Forest, Teri Garr, Raul Julia, Natassja Kinski, Harry Dean Stanton, Lanie Kazan, Allen Garfield, Rebecca DeMornay, Jeff Hamlin

Hank and Frannie don’t seem to be able to live together anymore. After a five-year relationship, lustful and dreamy Frannie leaves down-to-earth Hank on the anniversary of their relationship. Each one of them meets their dream mate, but as bright as they may seem, they are but a stage of lights and colors. Will true love prevail over a seemingly glamorous passion? Welcome to Coppola’s Broadway-like romantic musical.


watching this infamous film Which has quite a bit of history, now while one  didn’t love it respect and admire it. Also, ended up as great medicine for the soul. Francis Ford Coppola tried, and this is a piece of art. It’s inspiring, Beautiful though it’s too technical and limited in it’s passion still worth watching

One has to give him More Admiration as he does have a gift with musical or dance sequences, and no one swings for the rafters better

This film is experimental nature makes it a beautiful site to behold. That feels exciting and magical. Especially for the time that it was made when it seemed if you had enough clout anything was possible, and as a notary Director, you could take a big swing for the rafters and hope they paid off

I still think that Francis Ford Coppola should be noted for THE COTTON CLUB And this film is making musicals in the 1980s that had flare and had that all time spirit to them that made it feel like the films had soul. Supposedly even His film

TUCKER, A MAN AND HIS DREAMS Was supposed to be a musical at some point.

Go for everything that the film Has going, for it ends up a disappointment to a certain extent, but a beautiful attempt that feels like a time capsule almost. 

As even the music by Tom Waits, who, normally, I love most of his music, one can say this is not one of my favorite albums or music by him even though I can relate to the spirit of it, and it is listenable as it feels like sad, harmonious, ballads, and duets about love.

One of the weaknesses of the films that you don’t really care about the story Or the characters as there’s not really that much to either of them, as they always feel more like concepts than three dimensional characters, so that everything feels artificial as the sets that it takes place on, which are amazing to look at and beautifully built, but unfortunately again, artificial, which was it’s aim. As it always feels like a presentation a lark that feels like theater, which was supposed to be so it did succeed but achieved what It was supposed to in the end. That was simple as it was it seemed like most audiences just didn’t get it or we’re not that interested

Unfortunately, it wasn’t successful and was the last bomb that sunk Francis Ford Coppola zoetrope studios

The film plays more tour, earlier era where you went to films more be entertained, and hoped that some of the story or characters would be identifiable to the audience. If not, personally, they knew of the subject as this plays more as entertainment, and then something that feels deeply personal and thought out or even passion filled.

By the end one can’t help, but feel sorry for Natasha Kinski‘s character as she took a risk on this fling as it’s her first real taste of freedom she can even take not being the first in his heart, but as long as she has him feels like that’s good enough for her in the end she knew that he wouldn’t really be able to tear himself away and though she leaves she has nowhere really to go back to happily

The film is in Everyman Love story that feels vague. It’s a musical with some dance sequences, but the songs are sung Morris, voiceover and narration by Tom Waits and Crystal Gale. So the actors never really sang. They more perform. It’s also the rare film, where Noted character actor, Frederic Forest actually got to play the lead

In the end, it feels like a nice try No, you never feel anything other than a driving force and artistry being thrown at you

Grade: C+

THE BRINK’S JOB (1978)

Directed By: William Friedkin

Written By: Walon Green

Based on “BIG STICKUP AT BRINK’S” By: Noel Behn

Cinematography: Norman Leigh 

Editor: Bud Smith and Robert K. Lambert

Cast: Peter Falk, Peter Boyle, Allen Garfield, Gena Rowlands, Warren Oates, Paul Sorvino, Sheldon Leonard 

A fictional retelling of the infamous Boston Brink’s Company robbery on January 17th, 1950, of $2.7M, cost the American taxpayers $29M to apprehend the culprits with only $58,000 recovered.


The film feels fact-based and amazingly recreated, Sticking to the facts.  though it also feels like the film has no personality. Which is evident as neither do the characters. 

Just as the characters never come off as interesting just there to do a job or complete a mission no real character to them. As it’s supposed to be a comedy though the jokes are far away and many calamities happen in the caper. 

We never get to know any of the characters or their quirks to see how they might be funny or add to the proceedings. Even when given more of a comedic scenario. It feels so basic with no excitement that it just comes across as flat. 

Technically there is nothing wrong with it, But it comes and goes very easily without too much to remember. The cast is good, the production design is beautiful and the movie-making is good. It just feels like a project that was exactly where everyone did what was needed but nothing more or nothing less.

The film looks great from a production design stand pony and it feels like you are in that time. 

This was a film that was originally set up under director John Frankenheimer who left after problems with the studio. William Friedkin took over the project but threw out the original script and ordered a new one. So it wasn’t exactly a for-hire job. 

The film just seems to lack any spontaneity or any humor that many of the characters and situations the characters find themselves in and that the actors are clearly capable of but seem reigned in a bit. 

Grade: C

TEACHERS (1984)

Directed By: Arthur Hiller
Written By: W.R. McKinney
Cinematography: David M. Walsh 
Editor: Don Zimmerman 

Cast: Nick Nolte, Jobeth Williams, Judd Hirsch, Ralph Macchio, Allen Garfield, Lee Grant, Richard Mulligan, Laura Dern, Crispin Glover, Morgan Freeman, Steven Hill, William Schallert, Mary Alice, Anthony Heald Virginia Capers, Royal Dani, Art Metrano 

A teacher overcomes his frustration in a high-school full of flunkies. As he attempts to educate his students, he attempts to help them gets him into trouble with the school board, which only adds to his problems. With the support of his students, he beats the school board and his frustration.


This film is in the same vein as AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. Where it is a darkly satirical look at a system that wasn’t working. For that film, it was legal and the justice/court system. In this case public high school and just how dangerous it was for students and faculty. As you had kids who were uninterested and unmotivated. Teachers who were burnt out, scared, or don’t care and the unions and powers that be whose hands are tied or want them to do the best that they can with what they have yet offer no hope.

Now, while this film isn’t as sharp or necessarily as heavy as that film they do share a kinship. As well as with films like THE HOSPITAL and NETWORK (both of those written by Paddy Chayefsky) these are meant to be more ensemble films with a central figure in the lead who is riding on both sides until the end. Where they finally have to show where they stand and make some kind of difference even if ultimately lose.

This film is interesting as it can be funny. Especially pinpointing Richard Mulligan’s character, a teacher who gets into character to inspire his students and actually gets through to them. Before finding out he is an escaped mental patient.

What keeps the film lively is that one minute it can be gritty and dealt with seriously but then the next goes for a laugh that is more character-based comedy and less broad. 

Though there are many characters this film mainly focuses on Nick Nolte who is burnt out it actually seems to be the rare teacher who gives a damn. Though he wants to be a team player he has a reckless rebelliousness to him.

This role fits note to a The cuts an imposing figure but comes off quite intellectual. He is rugged throughout and tries his best but whenever he seems to be getting somewhere he has another bureaucratic door slammed in his face. This is a vintage performance from him where he is unpredictable but lively throughout. 

Nick Nolte is a famous actor. For me, he is an actor I discovered while looking for somebody else. He usually starred or Co-Starred in movies I initially watched for some other actor who was in the film for instance 48 HOURS I watched for Eddie Murphy and he co-Starred in it. I watched DOWN & OUT IN BEVERLY HILLS for Bette Midler he Co-Starred in it. I watched this film initially to see Ralph Macchio. He made this before KARATE KID, but I discovered it after he starred in that film.

The film has a recognizable cast. That looking back is impressive and all out to good use. The town of the film does become more serious after the death of a character.

Watching the film these days barely raises an eyebrow. But I remember when first seeing it felt scandalous like an expose almost. As it seems to try to shine a light on the problems of the then-current education system. Some of those problems still exist and some have gotten worse. It seems to try to take a bite but there is so much to chew it can only get to a certain amount of pieces presented.

This is a film that is worth watching to see how a film can make a point and bring up issues. By being gritty but also offering a light touch to round out and let the audience off somewhat. 

Grade: B