MissGoddess
-
Posts
22,766 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Posts posted by MissGoddess
-
-
> That's a very good point. She really was impatient, and I can see why. So she had to learn patience. Good things come to those who wait.
>
I think she had a rotten start in life, I don't remember specifics, but it seems like she had no family. You see, so much trouble starts when you aren't grounded with a close, loving family. What's strange is what about Carl? He had no family either? Usually, the loneliness of the wife left behind can be mitigated if there's family around (presuming you get along with them, of course). These two seemed sadly alone in the world. It's too bad. I can't blame Gilda for any of her problems, even if she was rash and impulsive sometimes. The deck really seemed stacked.
And no, I don't think that's an "excuse" for poor judgement and wrong choices, either. I know from stacked decks but I still try to make the occasional rational choice.
> She went from one private hell to another, basically. And the film does play like a prison flick, which is one of the reasons why the film didn't resonate as much with me. I'm not that crazy about prison flicks. Now I do like "captive" films, though. I love the tension with those.
>
You know I was going to say that! I thought yesterday "this plays like a prison film, I bet that's why FrankGrimes didn't care for it."
-
> Even though I know the scene where she is hiding in the crate on the ship is done because she's a stowaway, it just feels like that epitomizes her and Carl's relationship. She's to hide in the crate. She's to have faith.
>
It's funny you bring up that scene because I thought it was significant, too, but for a different reason. I thought it showed her impatience. She was understandably sick of being down there, but her life was at stake and you can't expect to "travel first class" when you're on the lam. That's when Carl tells her she has to have faith, again. Remember Leonie's words to her after the night's debauch? She basically told her she'd started something that would be hard to stop.
Carl's unrealistic expectation that she could just stay cooped up in a room for months goes back to what I said about leaving her in that hotel in the first place. If she roomed elsewhere, maybe she could have gotten out at least for fresh air. I don't know. Maybe the whole island was just one big "concentration camp" of sorts. Carl never should have left her there.
-
> What's the statute of limitations on that score?
I didn't know there was one.
Maybe that was the origin of the saying, "Sailor beware."
-
> My opinion is the same with them. It's as I mentioned, a woman will have to decide if she can love a man who is away from her the majority of the time. Jeff (James Stewart) was trying to push Lisa Carol (Grace Kelly) away by saying they were so different. Look at John Ford and his wife versus say Hitch and Alma. Different kinds of marriages. If a woman is okay with a man never being around, a good marriage and relationship is a strong possibility. *The Reckless Moment* features a "distant" marriage. But if a woman needs a man to be more than a provider of money, a provider of an emotional closeness and intimacy, then such a marriage and relationship is going to have major issues.
>
Of course. I think Gilda must have known that, growing up in New Orleans, probably near the docks.
> I just thought Gilda felt alone and needing Carl more than he was offering. It's seem like she was always told to wait for him, wait for him, wait for him.
>
That's what sailor's wives did. They waited.
-
If Carl were a soldier or a reporter, someone like say, "Jeff" in *Rear Window*, would you say the same? Carl's job takes him away, he's not "blowing out of town" to go hit the hot spots, he's got to go where the job takes him and when. Women who are married to sailors down through the ages know about that life, it's a lonely one, where they spend months on end, sometimes years, not seeing their husband or even knowing if he's alive. I wonder how many "Dads" came home to children that looked suspiciously unlike them.
-
> So what did you make of Gilda telling Carl that he wouldn't be happy away from the sea? Is that something she did come to realize for herself or do you think that was purely her trying to soften the blow for him?
I thought it was to soften the blow...it could be a bit of both since she never got his letters and thought he'd not even bothered to write.
> As you know, I have felt she did come to realize what Carl really did love the most. I definitely believe he loved Gilda, but she was second. I get the feeling his thinking was, "I'm not at sea, so what the heck do I do? Go see Gilda! She'll keep me busy until it's time to go."
>
I'm not sure it was that bad, I think he was always looking forward to coming back and seeing her.
> I think all of that is a very fair statement. I don't see the majority of the board looking to analyze films. It's more about sharing some opinions on favorites and recent TCM airings. There's nothing wrong with that. I prefer analysis, though.
>
I do to, mixed with fun.
-
Hi, CinemAva,
Misspent adol-- okay. Ohhhhhkay. I'll bite. What'd you do? Return some library books back late?
Ha! I guess I mean that I spent too much time with my nose buried in books.
I like your list of ten 30's stars. I couldn't whittle mine down without causing myself a serious lobotomy.
Thank you. The lists were short because those 5 are easy. It's naming the rest in order that would cause me brain damage.
For character actors today, I'd have to go with Paul Giamatti, Steve Buscemi and Philip Seymour Hoffman. I also think Laura Linney, Marcia Gay Harden, Frances McDormand are leading character actresses. They may not be the star of the picture; but they sure can carry it. I know...I know. They?re no Una Merkel.
I know some of those and agree with you they're excellent performers. As for Una, there's only one Una but don't tell O'Connor that!
Edited by: MissGoddess on Dec 4, 2011 10:02 PM
-
Ha! Allen's in *Lawyer Man*, too!
-
One is the wonderful gentleman I met recently, Michael Rispoli, who was in The Hunter Thompson movie The Rum Diary with Johnny Depp and also played in While You Were Sleeping and The Sopranos. Michael plays extremely memorable characters, ones who really grab your attention.
The other is Stephen Root, who's been in countless films, and has worked with The Coen Brothers a lot. He was just in the movie J. Edgar , and as usual, I didn't recognize him till he was on screen for a minute. He is as changeable as a chameleon, and gets these odd, sometimes bit parts, where he fades into the character so much that you don't always know it's him. He is someone I ALWAYS love to see, because I know he will do something quite different and exciting with what he's given. He also has a part in another new movie, Big Miracle, playing the governor of Alaska, I think.
Thank you for tipping me off on some character players working today. I'm sure if I saw these movies, those are the actors I would be interested in the most, not the leads. I'm starting to notice them more and more when I do find myself watching something recent.
-
Great list, Mave, and I am sure at one time or another I checked those three books out of the Public Library in my misspent adolescence.
1930s
1. Clark Gable
2. Spencer Tracy
3. Will Rogers
4. William Powell
5. Gary Cooper
1. Vivien Leigh
2. Carole Lombard
3. Myrna Loy
4. Bette Davis
5. Barbara Stanwyck
-
I can't wait to read the discussion that ensues on Earrings of Madame de... Sounds like you and MrGrimes found a real connection with it. I have to figure out what I missed!
Well, if he's game...I am. You didn't care for it? Wow!
I did like it! I just didn't love it, or rather, I felt a bit cold about one of the leads (you just know it couldn't be Boyer). I look forward to the ensuing discussion to find out what I may have missed or did not take into consideration.
-
> He seemed like the kind of guy who just tossed gifts, hugs, kisses, and words at his woman to appease her, to hold her over. The kiss has to last a long, long time. Heck if he knows what's going on her in life.
>
>
> I'm also bothered by his, "I should have done better, forgive me?" It almost feels like that's how he always is. It's like a child saying they are sorry without actually feeling sorry. They just know that's how they can get off the hook. It's not about feeling it, it's about saying it.
>
That wouldn't surprise me if that were true about him. He doesn't spend more than a few seconds asking about her life since he was gone. I would say he's slightly irresponsible in a youthful sort of way, and just inexperienced about looking out for anyone but himself. If things had worked out as he planned, that he'd been able to take that shore job and settle down with GIlda, I believe, or I'd like to believe, that those flaws would have smoothed themselves out as he lived day to day as a provider and husband and eventually, a father.
By the way, I would agree that this board is made up of folks who enjoy the 1930s films over all other decades. And Jackie is also right (why am I so agreeable lately with everyone? Something must be wrong!
) that there's precious little in-depth discussion of those movies by their fans. I think that's because most people come here to shoot the breeze, they are not interested in real in-depth discussion. Many even roll their eyes over our rambles, and still others do converse in depth---about controversial and potentially flammable subjects that have precious little to do with movies. Our little core group of ramblers are by far the most consistent at digging in deep on all kinds of movies. That's not everyone's cup of tea, nor do they all have time for it. -
You should feel worried! Morality vs. feelings
Gulp... (this isn't going to be one of those where we end up in a mud fight is it???????)
Pour vouz, madame Stone.
-
Ok, I finished *Safe in Hell*. I agree with both MrGrimes and Jackie about Carl.
I didn't find anything really inexcusably selfish about Carl, he was doing what he loved by being a seaman, yes, and when you plan on marrying a girl that can be a little selfish. Sailors don't make the ideal husbands, any more than cops or soldiers. But Gilda knew him since they were kids, so if she wasn't kicking about that I don't think the movie wants us in the audience to, either.
He basically did what he could for her. The only thing he might have done better is when he took her to the island, he might have hustled around town to see if he could rent her a room somewhere. That may have been the only hotel in town, but who says she has to live in a hotel? For a little extra money, I'm sure plenty of people there, including some decent ones, might have rented her a room. That the idea didn't even come up was a little careless on both their parts.
Carl says a few times before leaving Gilda and brings it up on their last time together, that Gilda "has to have faith in Him". He seems really sincere about that, because of the gesture of going to the chapel and going through the ceremony with the prayer book and then leaving her with that book and those words. He said it a couple of times, and then he asked her if she knew what being his wife meant. She said yes, that he'd be the only man for her from then on. So that was the promise she was determined to keep.
Testing her resolve, was of course Bruno and his machinations, the worst of which was withholding Carl's mail from Gilda. If she'd gotten even one of those letters, it might have really changed everything. She'd have been bound to have told everyone about the letter, she'd have had money to pay the rent and wouldn't have been as vulnerable. Thinking Carl hadn't written did put her in a spot, it was a real test of faith. But to her credit, she never forgot her promise right to the end.
> {quote:title=FrankGrimes wrote:}{quote}You make excellent points about Carl, but I do believe there is a selfishness to always doing what you want to do at the price of your love. It gets old after a while. I'll have to watch the opening again. Why did she have to do what she did? Something drove her to that. Where was Carl?
The movie actually does explain that. When he proposes and she turns him down, she explains what happened and she said that Pete, the guy she thinks she killed, molested her when she was living in his and his wife's house (I don't know if they owned a rooming house or not) and the wife found out about it and drove her out into the street, went to her job and told the employer a dirty story about it to get her fired and that is what drove Gilda to hit the streets. Evidently, Gilda wasn't the type to write about her troubles to Carl, which is why she never told him. That's when he showed he had a pair and owned up that it was his fault, for not being around.
So I agree Carl probably has a normal degree of masculine selfishness to him, the kind that men who go off to sea, to war, to explore, to the office and leaves the woman behind without much thought. That's no good, but it's not the worst thing in the world either since he was also working to pay for their life together, there's no indication he was out there just to be fancy free. He was making plans.
Gilda had seen much worse guys and she said she knew he loved her and that was why she changed. She wasn't ever going to bad again, not ever.
As to her saying to him: "You always loved the sea, you'd never be happy away from it", watching that scene and considering she was trying not to tell him what her fate was, I think she was feeding him the idea that he wasn't to waste his life after he found out the truth about her, that he was to know that she wanted him to go on with what he loved and she understood. She didn't want him to blame himself after she was gone, or give up the sea. I don't think she said it because she was declaring that she knew he'd always put his work ahead of her. I believe she was trying to comfort him. If he'd been a painter, she'd have told him to go on painting more and better paintings.
Basically he was as she said, the only guy that ever treated her decent, even after he knew the hardest thing a man can find out about his girl.
Edited by: MissGoddess on Dec 3, 2011 7:45 PM
-
*He's gallant.*
There you have it. He is that, very much so. Very much indeed. What a guy. Did you read that article posted up in, I believe, "Hot Topics", where the two actors discuss working with him when they were kids?
-
I'm only 35 minutes in, but I still haven't detected anything all that selfish about Carl (Donald Cook) or his being a sailor. I see that the hangman or whatever he is has started keeping Carl's letters (and presumably, money) from her, so that shows Carl was as good as his word to begin with. He risked a lot bringing her to the island though he readily took the blame for her situation because, as he told her, "I wasn't around to look after you." So maybe yes, when they first began talking marriage maybe he should have given up the sea but maybe like Jackie said, there's only so many choices and he saw a way for advancement where there was no other likely opportunity. Does that make him selfish or a man who thinks of the future?
Edited by: MissGoddess on Dec 3, 2011 6:40 PM
-
I happily discovered I do have *Safe in Hell* after all, so
I will try to re-watch it today, maybe after *Mogambo* is
finished on TCM, because this discussion really has me
scrambling to see where my own feelings will fall.
One of the reasons I love Wellman is his ability to start with a stereotype (the prostitute, the scum of the earth) and turn it upside down by the end of the film. It's his greatest gift as a filmmaker I think.
Those words made me instantly think of Samuel Fuller. Maybe they
were kindred spirits as directors.
Hollywood in the 30s and 40s, particularly the 30s seemed very
egalitarian about these fringe characters. They really gave them
them the lion's share of really grounded, even respected, character
opportunities. They were often "in support" of the stars, of course,
but you often got the feeling the spirit of the film makers was behind
these guys and gals, not necessarily the leads'. A collective "Greek
Chorus" and where the humanity can be found in so many movies.
No wonder you like them so much. So do I.
I just watched an episode of "The Barbara Stanwyck Show" that
featured Elizabeth Patterson. She was really old by this point,
and obviously not completely well, but what a spark there still
was, and she was given generous screen time and fine role. I
can feel that she was the most humane and interesting of
the characters in the playlet, and she by this point only had
to "be", she was such a pro. I miss these people, sometimes
more than stars because stars are still around, but the almost
unlimited roles for character performers doesn't exist. They're
still working but often "invisible" now, which is sad.
I didn't mean to digress, back to *Safe in Hell*.
-
I love that graphic of Bill! You have as always, great taste. I had no
idea Bill was your tippy top favorite. Even more than Ben? You
described his appeal perfectly, by the way. He is one of the most
effortless performers. I can't wait for you to see *Lawyer Man*. It's a bit
racy, I warn you. One scene had me gaping, it was so bold. And it was
directed by the *Jewel Robbery* director, William Dieterle.
-
I never even heard of that movie! I'll look out for it. I love the title. The kid looks scary. This isn't a "bad seed" movie is it?
William Powell. sigh. I'm falling for him all over again with these movies this month. What a splendid run he had Thursday even into Friday morning. I watched *Lawyer Man*, wow!! It was terrific.
I can't wait to read the discussion that ensues on *Earrings of Madame de...* Sounds like you and MrGrimes found a real connection with it. I have to figure out what I missed!
-
Oooh, "Brandy". I always loved that song. It always conjured up a scene from an old movie to me. Not any real movie I ever saw, just one in my head.
-
It was definitely this year, no earlier. Over the summer, in fact. I'm sure Grimes knows better, and I'm pretty sure it was in the Walk on the Noir Side thread.
-
I give up trying to pigeon hole movies as this genre/style or that. I'm terrible at it and it really doesn't matter to me, except as a topic for conversation. I pretty much lump everything but westerns and musicals as "drama" or "comedy".
-
Hi, movieman! Yes I've seen *The Naked Kiss*, we talked a little about it in the "Walk on the Noir Side" thread, I believe.
*THE NAKED KISS* SPOILERS
I totally agree with your reaction...it's exactly how I saw it the first time I watched. It was all you say. I felt like I needed a shower after, yet it got under my skin and I really do admire that Fuller is showing us how these people, people like Kelly, basically are doing what they can with the cards they've been dealt by a world founded on bitterly wicked unfairness. They've sinned but they've been sinned against far more. Look how slimy the cop was...how long it took him to see the truth. Because he'd had truth cynicalled out of him along time ago. He thought no one could fool him. His best pal was a saint. Why? Because he was his pal or was he fooled by the respectable front, too, even though he thought he was too "wise" to care about such things? Lots of "naked truths". How innocence gets raped. It's a thoroughly tough film that I don't know if I could ever watch again. Constance was great.
Hopefully, FrankGrimes will reply to you because he really liked the movie and understood it better than I could explain it.
Edited by: MissGoddess on Dec 2, 2011 8:28 PM
-
Boy, yesterday was a landmark day!
CONGRATULATIONS to a TCM original femme fatale:
CINEMAVEN
For reaching 12K lethal posts!!!
Welcome to the club.
Yes, Gene, that's T-Mave!
OK, we all need a cigarette after reading one of CinemAva's witty rambles.
The Annual FrankGrimes Torture Thread
in Your Favorites
Posted
So mister GRimsey: who's offereing and who's the offerree?