Word: macgowran
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1967-1967
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...Richard Lester mixes explosively funny moments with comedy of a blacker sort in a surrealistic vision of war, as a platoon of World War II tommies (including Michael Crawford, Jack MacGowran, John Lennon) attempts to build an officers' cricket field behind enemy lines...
...Richard Lester mixes explosively funny moments with comedy of a blacker sort in a surrealistic vision of war, as a platoon of World War II tommies (including Michael Crawford, Jack MacGowran, John Lennon) attempts to build an officers' cricket field behind enemy lines...
...Richard Lester juxtaposes slapstick with hard slaps at the brutality of battle in his surrealistic film about a platoon (Michael Crawford, Jack MacGowran, John Lennon) of World War II tommies hell-bent on building an officers' cricket field behind enemy lines...
Hunting the wily vampire, a batty professor (Jack MacGowran) and his simpleton assistant (Polanski) come to Dracula country and put up at an inn suspiciously festooned in garlic-a well-known specific against bloodsuckers. Things augur well when the luscious Sharon Tate is savagely fondled and fangled in her bath by caped Count Krolock, who makes off with her into the snowy night, leaving a sinister splash of blood on the soapsuds. But by the time that professor and assistant totter to the rescue with their bag of crucifixes (to ward off the vampires), the plot creaks even more than...
...cruel. What saves Lester's movie from banality is its dazzlingly surrealistic approach and moments of explosively funny comedy-notably, a court-martial scene in the desert that rivals the Red Queen's interrogation of Alice for sheer illogic. In a generally first-rate cast, Jack MacGowran is outstanding as a mad soldier who could have stepped from the plays of Beckett, while Crawford, as the silly subaltern, alternates hilariously between villainy and vanity. Despite its pictorial audacity and quirky humor, the picture is less impressive as a film against war than as a war against film...