Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Cinemascope

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,161

  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Cinemascope

    The Departed

    in Film Noir--Gangster

    Posted

    Awesome that Marty and The Departed won Oscars for best director and best picture, respectively. :)

     

    In that regard, it was one of the most satisfying Oscar ceremonies in recent memory (never mind the usual tackiness of the ceremony itself :P )

    A. Hitchcock's THE MAN WHO ...

    in Films and Filmmakers

    Posted

    If you want to get really nitty-picky, you could say it was released in the U.K. in 1934 and in the U.S. in 1935. Naturally I know it's generally considered more correct to refer to the year of release in the country of origin, but sometimes people can get confused with the year of American release.

     

    Just in case anyone here is interested, here's the review of TMWKTM that ran in the NYT in 1935:

     

    March 23, 1935

    At the Mayfair.

    A.S.

     

    The British cinema, never notable for its command of filmic pace, goes in for a blistering style of story-telling in "The Man Who Knew Too Much," the new photoplay at the Mayfair Theatre. Directed with a fascinating staccato violence by Alfred Hitchcock, it is the swiftest screen melodrama this column can recall, with the possible exception of "Fog Over Frisco." Normally the work would be important chiefly because it offers Peter Lorre in his first part since his remarkable performance as the insane killer in "M." But "The Man Who Knew Too Much" is distinctly Mr. Hitchcock's picture. Although the photography and lighting are inferior according to Hollywood standards, the film is an interesting example of technical ingenuity as well as an absorbing melodrama.

     

    It is the story of an Englishman and his wife and child who, by the sheerest of accidents, became involved in an anarchist plot to assassinate a foreign diplomatist in London. They are at a resort in St. Moritz when an invisible gunman shoots one of their chance acquaintances. The dying man asks Mr. Lawrence to find a hidden code message in his rooms and relay it at once to the British Foreign Office. Lawrence locates the message, but before he can turn it over to the British authorities his child is kidnapped and he is warned that the girl will be safe only so long as he maintains his silence. Upon their return to London the Lawrences are besieged by the secret service for the momentous code message, but decide they are more interested in saving their little girl's life than in preventing a possible war. Mr. Lawrence and a friend engage in a bit of private sleuthing, are captured by the anarchists, and in the grand climax find themselves trapped with the assassins in a hideout which the police are bombarding.

     

    Mr. Hitchcock tells the story in a succession of brief and tantalizing scenes which merge so breathlessly that you are always rapt and tense. The method, of course, subordinates the actors to the technique, but Mr. Lorre, as the anarchist leader, is able to crowd his r?le with dark and terrifying emotions without disturbing his placid moon face. Then there are Edna Best as the wife, Leslie Banks as the husband, Hugh Wakefield as the amateur sleuth, and Nova Pilbeam as the kidnapped child. Pierre Fresnay becomes a corpse so hurriedly that you scarcely have time to know he is in the cast.

     

     

    THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH, based on a story by Charles Bennett and D. B. Wyndham Lewis; screen play by Edwin Greenwood and A. R. Rawlinson, with additional dialogue by Emlyn Williams; directed by Alfred Hitchcock; a Gaumont British production. At the Mayfair.

     

    Betty Lawrence . . . . . Nova Pilbeam

    Abbott . . . . . Peter Lorre

    Lawrence . . . . . Leslie Banks

    Jill . . . . . Edna Best

    Ledine . . . . . Frank Vosper

    Clive . . . . . Hugh Wakefield

    Louis . . . . . Pierre Fresnay

    Nurse Agnes . . . . . Cicely Oates

    Binstead . . . . . D A. Clarke Smith

    Gibson . . . . . George Curzon

    And the Oscar goes to.....

    in General Discussions

    Posted

    And you'll remember those two movies long after

    you've forgotten this year's Oscar telecast, because

    that's just what it was (the awards themselves

    notwithstanding) forgettable ! . Criticism

    seems to outweigh praise by a wide margin. If I'm

    being judgmental, I seem to have a lot of company!

     

    Well, if there's a lot of people who find fault in everything then perhaps I can get some Prozac and hand it out! ;)

     

    But seriously, you are saying that you didn't watch the Oscars but that they were forgettable?? How can you forget something you didn't watch?

     

    If you think you're better off ignoring the Oscars, then by all means that's your prerrogative, but why are you criticizing something you didn't even watch? If others enjoy it, then why feel compelled to point out how much you dislike something you don't even watch?

     

    Isn't that a bit like if I was to go into the Fred Astaire thread and just say horrible things about FA? Well, if I didn't like FA, I'd just stay out of the FA thread. :)

    And the Oscar goes to.....

    in General Discussions

    Posted

    They could have done away with the whole first hour, and to sink to Seinfeld as a speaker was sad. I know I'm gong to hear a lot of grumbling from all of you, but when more than half of the show should have had subtitles, that's a little much for me.

     

    I actually enjoyed the first hour quite a bit more than the middle. What did you think was wrong with it? And what's wrong with Seinfeld? I never watched his sitcom regularly so I know relatively little about him, and in spite of some reservations, I've to confess he made me laugh.

     

    Your comment about subtitles is very interesting... I hope I'm not grumbling, but I do feel a bit of concern that it might be interpreted as a bit xenophobic (even if that wasn't your intent). People from other countries have contributed a lot to cinema, both behind the camera and in front of it... we were very lucky in the 20th century that a lot of emigres who had to flee Europe because of WWII came to America and decided to work in the movies.

     

    I think it's great that the film business is becoming more globalized -- just as all of our world is becoming more globalized, for better or for worse (and sometimes it's a bit of both).

     

    So I think it's great that peoples from all over the world are represented in the Oscar, both those who are still living and working mainly in their countries of origin, and those who have immigrated to the U.S. to continue their film work. It makes for a richer industry, culturally, and a less ethnocentric film industry.

     

    I don't mind that some of the people might have spoken in foreign languages during the ceremony, in fact I think it's a great testament to the global power of movies, one industry in which the U.S. still could be considered the world leader in most regards.

    And the Oscar goes to.....

    in General Discussions

    Posted

    And yey for The Departed!!!!!!!!!!!! :)

     

    final tally ---

    The Departed 4

    Pan's Labyrinth 3

    Little Miss Sunshine 2

    The Departed 2

    An Inconvenient Truth 2

    Dreamgirls 1

    Letters from Iwo Jima 1

    Marie Antoinette 1

    Happy Feet 1

    Babel 1

    Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest 1

    The Queen 1

© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...