A Disappointing Continuation

I gave this film a 9 out of 10, because it was exactly what I expected it to be.

The biggest problem with this movie is it’s a little better than you think it might be, which somehow makes it worse. As in, it takes itself a bit too seriously, which makes most of the movie feel kind of dull.

Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

Showing recently on the UK Spike channel, I decided to watch it again, having seen it on TV many years ago. However I could remember very little of the film except the "unmaskings" at the end. Having said that , I still felt cheated by the apparent non-appearance of the Hollywood stars during the picture. And let's be blunt. George C Scott as the lead would hardly be box-office dynamite in 1963! It seems that Huston was indulging in a little joke at our expense. Literally if you'd paid to see the film at the cinema! What we end up with is a curate's egg which is confusing, rather than good, in parts. It plays like a modernised version of those old "Righty-o guvnor" Hollywood portrayals of England, with some of the actors, Scott included, slipping between affected upper-class English accents and trans-Atlantic tones. And that's apart from the French guy who is ,at times,unintelligible! The appearance of several actors in heavy makeup creates a fake fog. The characters played by Tony Curtis and Frank Sinatra do nothing to advance the story and then we have the double double cross where in retrospect it is obvious that the female hunt protester is definitely not Burt Lancaster in drag! Since Kirk Douglas is immediately recognisable upon his first change of disguise it is left to Robert Mitchum to actually contribute meaningfully. John Huston's own cameo also suggests that the whole thing is a bit of a tease. Although Hitchcock inevitably does it much better. In fact there is a tenuous Hitch link. With all this facial makeup, I realised that the actress who played Mrs Slattery was the bearded lady in Saboteur. There were English actors thrown in. Bernard Archard and Herbert Marshall. Although Marshall was Hollywood of course.And did anyone notice Lynch, one of the grooms? He was played by Bernard Fox who was Colonel Gracie in Titanic. I believe Fox went to Hollywood probably in he early sixties and appeared in a number of films. Usually as a comedy villain. The fox-hunting scenes are offensive today. Particularly the one where the fox is being savaged by the hounds. But I would have to agree that the fox hunting was relevant to the plot. In conclusion the film would have been better played straight and with English actors as the leads omitting the big-name guests who, no doubt added considerably to the budget. My wife's opinion? "Complete and utter drivel!"

THE LIST OF ADRIAN MESSENGER is an incredibly inventive murder mystery/thriller, made by John Huston and shot on his estate in Ireland. It's quite unlike any other film I've watched, the stark black-and-white shooting style accompanying the action quite nicely. It's one of those films where the mystery is deliciously ambiguous until around the halfway mark.I found the early scenes to be the best part of the film as you have no idea what's going to happen next. Evil Kirk Douglas proves a master of disguise as he goes around bumping people off and making it look like they were killed in accidents. George C. Scott is a delight as the amateur detective who gets drawn into the proceedings and Jacques Roux is even better as the warm-hearted Frenchman and Watson character.Eventually the story begins to make sense but it continues to engage anyway thanks to the strong performances. The latter half of the story gets bogged down a bit in the fox hunting scenes but it still picks up for a climax tying it all together nicely. One of the most interesting things about the production are the elaborate disguises worn by characters; the make-up which includes face masks and even false eyes is really something special. I found most of the celebrity cameos to be a bit of a distraction, but all of the winking and grinning at the end is irresistible.

This enjoyable suspenser contains intriguing events , emotion , and plot twists . A former intelligence officer called Anthony Gethryn (George C. Scott) is tasked by the heir to the Gleneyre estate to investigate the unusual deaths of a disparate group of eleven men on a list . Later on , a mysterious stranger (Kirk Douglas) visiting an English state whose owner is a Lord , Marquis of Gleneyre (Clive Brook) , and the puzzling series of killings that coincide with his arrival . As retired MI-5 officer has to figure out the unusual deaths of a varied group of eleven men on a list , each seems to have died in mysterious circumstances . Working with a survivor from a airplane disaster, Raoul Le Borg (Jacques Roux) he discovers weird clues until an unexpected conclusion . The main question is the following : Someone committed killings . Can you guess who's behind the disguise?This whodunit packs crisp performance , intrigue , thrilling scenes , suspense , twists and turns . The main gimmick results to be the all-star-cast are all heavily disguised in the character roles . This is a family film made by John Huston , as it was partially filmed on John Huston's own estate in Ireland and played by Huston's friends as well as his son . The best scenes turned to be when the stars appeared at end of the film in unmasking sequence where they peeled off makeup . Highlights of the movie result to be the fox chase scenes under an impressive soundtrack by Jerry Goldsmith . Very good support cast such Robert Mitchum , Tony Curtis , Frank Sinatra , Herbert Marshall , Gladys Cooper , Marcel Dalio , Bernard Fox , being the fourth of seven films that Kirk Douglas and Burt Lancaster made together and final film of Clive Brook . And cameo by John Huston , who was an avid rider and hunter, appeared in a small role as Lord Ashton in a short dialogue scene in the last hunt . The filmmaker's child Tony , billed as Anthony Waller Huston plays Dana Winter's son . Evocative as well as atmospheric cinematography in black and white by Joseph MacDonald . Thrilling and suspenseful musical score by the great Jerry Goldsmith . The motion picture well produced by Edward Lewis was stunningly by the great John Huston at his best , its tense filmmaking makes this crackerjack entertainment . The picture was made in a good time of the 60s , 70s and 80s when Huston resurged as a director of quality films with Fat City, (1972), The man who would be king (1975) and Wise blood (1979). He ended his career on a high note with Under volcano (1984), the afore-mentioned Honor of Prizzi (1985) and Dublineses (1987). Rating : Above average , this is one of John Huston's best films , a model of his kind , definitely a must see if you are aficionado to suspense films . Huston broke a new ground with this landmark movie , providing classic scenes and agreeable dialogs . Rating : Above average , as the intrigue is entertaining on its own .

Anthony Gethryn is enjoying a weekend in the country with an old flame, Lady Jocelyn, and her cousin Adrian Messenger. Then, after a fox hunt, Anthony is pulled aside by Adrian, and Adrian gives him a list of names. He tells Anthony to look into their names, but doesn't give any reason why. Adrian then leaves for America, but en route his airplane explodes, and he dies. Anthony begins to look into the names, before realizing that most of them are dead.He then meets with a man who tells him Adrian's last words. Suddenly, he begins to realize that someone wanted him dead, and everyone on his list as well. Along with Jocelyn and a man named Raoul, Anthony slowly begins to realize that a massive conspiracy is underway, but it is too late?In order to make a good thriller, one must have three components. A plot that contains an amount of mystery, a lead with whom you can cheer for, and a feeling of palpable dread. The List of Adrian Messenger has none of the above. Does that make it a bad movie? No, but it certainly doesn't make it a good thriller. It appears to be Huston just sitting back and resting. Indeed, when I read the plot summary, I thought the premise was very good indeed. It sounded exactly like the stuff good thrillers were made of.Of course, it wasn't. Huston wasn't nearly involved enough to give the film any edge whatsoever. The entire affair felt as if Huston was just going through the motions. Despite the outstanding cast, Tony Curtis, Burt Lancaster, Robert Mitchum, Kirk Douglas, Frank Sinatra, Dana Wynter, and George C. Scott, only Scott, Wynter and Douglas are on screen for any measure of time. In fact, most of the film rests on the shoulders of Scott.George C. Scott is an outstanding actor, but here, despite the initial shock of "it's George C. Scott with a mustache!" he doesn't really do much with the character. The British accent is admirable, but even it soon wears thin (along with the mustache), and in fact his character is surprisingly dull. It doesn't help that he is given some really bad lines ("This is not the work of many men, but one man who is many men!"), but a veteran actor like Scott should have been able to flush out his performance.Dana Wynter was perfectly suited to be furniture, and her performance is wooden as a board, but not because of her. It isn't fault that her character is perfectly useless. There is a connection between her and Scott's character mentioned, but it is dropped after a few lines. Jacques Roux, who plays Scott's sidekick also suffers from having nothing to do. The juiciest part of the film goes to Kirk Douglas, as the man who is many men, and he is good. The thing is, he isn't given enough time to show his evilness, and the film's lightweight tone doesn't help him either.The celebrity cameos never elevate above gimmick, and the film doesn't showcase the cameos enough for the audience members to guess who is who. The script had promise, but under Huston's monotonous direction, the plot never really excites. In fact the film's tone is so light, one could mistake it for a satire, similar in tone to Beat the Devil. The first half really makes this seem as if it was actually what Huston wanted. However, when the second half begin, it is made clear that this is not a comedy, much to the film's detriment.The makeup used to hide the celebrities is actually not half bad, but it makes the skin of the mask look very old, and plastic like. Still, it is convincing enough to hide many celebrities, and it makes for an interesting enough ending. The film's sets are really basic, and even the climax is kind of boring. The plane crash scene looks intensely amateurish, especially when compared to a similar scene in Hitchcock's Foreign Correspondent in 1940.The cinematography is one note, and never becomes that interesting. The fox hunting scenes are the best shot scenes of the film, but the sport itself is rather confusing to me. Which brings me to the direction by Huston. Lax doesn't describe it. Anyone could have shot this film, and none of Huston's usual trademarks can be seen. It is a very boring exercise, only because no one seemed interested in the film, except Kirk Douglas. And even Douglas wasn't allowed to do much because Huston wasn't doing much.In short, what could have been a great thriller falls short of it's target. It still manages to entertain, but not nearly as much as it could have.The List of Adrian Messenger, 1963, Starring: George C. Scott, Kirk Douglas and Dana Wynter, Directed by John Huston, 6/10 (C-)(This is part of an ongoing project to watch and review every John Huston movie. You can read this and other reviews at http://www.everyjohnhustonmovie.blogspot.ca/)