FrankGrimes

*Did I hear someone mention the moon and the stars? Just call me Mrs. Bovary.* Good evening, Mrs. Bovary. *That's an interesting comparison... it doesn't have the resonance that The Informer has, the director's voice making a generalization about the depths of human nature.* I agree, *The Informer* is a deeper, more visceral film. But I liked the twist with *Death of a Scoundrel*. Both Gypo (Victor McLaglen) and Clementi (George Sanders) wish to be "King." But Gypo's way is to be unselfish, to "spread the wealth." Clementi's way is to be selfish, to take people for all they got. Gypo is the one being taken in *The Informer*. *But it is a heck of a lot of fun, and I really think George Sanders is perfect in it.* I'm with ya. I was definitely entertained by *Death of a Scoundrel*. I thought it captured American greed at its finest. *You want to see how he could get away with it, but that's not all. He's a far better actor than people give him credit for. One doesn't automatically think of him as the type to show guilt or remorse, but he does it in both films I mentioned to you. And is moving when he does.* I'm a George Sanders fan, and I really did enjoy seeing him dominate a film like he does *Death of a Scoundrel*. But I also liked the women in the film. They were terrific. *How did you like the opening credits? * Do you mean the scenes in Europe of the actual credits?

*Can you be clearer? Do you mean which movies by a director are the ones that the popcorn fans liked the least?* No, just what films represent you, for whatever reason. Not just "your favorites," but films that match who you are.

*I sometimes wonder if the other directors started out with the desire to be more artistic, but found it hard to fight for that in a commercial business, and hard to contend with the undeniable fact that then and even more so now, most peopel do NOT watch movies with a view to finding anything deeper than what's obvious.* I think it's simply that some directors viewed their job as their job while others viewed it as an artistic outlet. There are painters who paint for art and painters who will paint what you tell them to paint. *The smartest ones learned to make movies that were entertaining to the popcorn crowd but which provided something more if you cared to look closer.* Correct. The best were (and still are) making films that appeal to themselves and included themselves, first and foremost. John Ford was making his films just as Alfred Hitchcock was making his. If they were just making studio flicks, they'd make the same darn pictures. But Hitch chased his interests and Ford chased his. And if you were to have Hitchcock and Ford direct the same story, it would come out totally different. The studio directors would direct films similarly. *It's interesting to look at where the "auteurs" had their most crashing box office failures: in their most personal efforts. Ford had his The Fugitive (and The Sun Shines Bright) and Powell had his Peeping Tom. Orson Welles had a career full of them. Hawks I think for the most part abandoned any idea of "seriousness" after the early thirties (too bad in a way, because I really like the remake of his first silent,* *The Road to Glory...that he remade it tells me it meant something to him, but he got burned somehow...I forget if it was poor box office or sneering criticism, but after that he concentrated on humor and group dynamics. He decided to make his movies as personally enjoyable to make as they are to watch, as possible. Even Hitch did not get the kind of reception he wanted for* *Vertigo.* It seems like the most personal films tend to be overly serious. You know, I've been thinking, what would a litmus test be for each us? What films "test" our personal levels with any movie fan? *Vertigo* is a great one for me. That's one where I'd expect most common movie watchers to say it's "stupid."

*The Informer?* Yes, you got it!

*HA! You know me too well. :DYes, I do roll my eyes.. a LOT. (but always with good reason... ok.. maybe not always.. sometimes I just like to feel them roll) * At least you admit it. *And though it MAY seem like I am at "low level" (for "chick flickiness" ha.) it just depends on WHAT the chick flick is all about... because really.. how DO you define a chick flick anyway?? ha. Because all "chicks" have their own personal spin on that, I'm a-thinkin')* *I L-O-V-E love the "romance factor" in a lot other movies.. again, it just depends.* You tend to be a realist versus a dreamer. Jackie is a dreamer versus a realist. You like a traditional kind of romance that can be found in Ford. Your loving Hondo's comment about "baking" is your kind of romance. You would roll your eyes if he started to talk about the moon and the stars (dreams). But baking (realist) is gonna light your fire. Very traditional. *Usually true. (unless he is a reformed one)* Ha! *And no, I don't necessarily HAVE to be able to relate to the characters to enjoy the "romance" factor in a story.. but I just want to be at least a little interested in them and their circumstances to enjoy the moive.. ha.* I think it all stems from how you perceived yourself as a young lass. If a young gal doesn't see herself in romantic situations, she usually scoffs at them. *And let's face facts, ha.. the whole "playboy" thing is all very "un-me" ha. I don't like "jet-setter" characters either.. usually.* *(Which is why I don't lean too heavy on late 50's or 60's (or even 70's.. ha) romance movies, generally speaking.. ha. It seems like most of those have play boys.. and also "jet-setters" just popping out all over... ha.)* The 30s is full of playboys, too. Lots of society guys. You won't find too many playboys in westerns. *(Ok, truthfully.. the real problem is, I am likely just too boring.. I freely confess it, ha)* You appreciate the simpler things in life. I really like that about you. So many girls get caught up in expecting the moon and the stars, Madame Bovary. Natalie Wood's character in *Love with the Proper Stranger* struggles with this, as well. In the end, we are to define what the moon and stars really are. Cinderella?! Come on, now!

ALL of those words are Miss G's, Silly Goose! *My film? Do you mean Death of a Scoundrel or* *Five Star FInal ? hmmm.* Death of a Scoundrel.

*Well.. I do have a level of "chick-flickness" in me.. ha.* It's a low level! You're an eye-roller! *For whatever reason, this particular story never really "gets" me (all together.. I do like the old "grandma lady".. or is it his mother.. or his aunt.. I haven't seen it in a long time.. so I just can't remember who she is exactly)* Yeah, I can't see you going for a playboy. *Hmmm... Could it mean that despite ALL your many (many, many) protests to the contrary, that underneath all that sawdust and saur kraut beats a heart that is all "sweet and mushy" for happy endings and romance movies????????? (at least SOMEtimes anyway)* Impossible!

Good scorching-hot afternoon to you, Spunky -- *Frank, your words about The Long Gray Line really moved me. You have a great grasp of the story within the story - this one I didn't really understand at first. On second viewing it became more clear to me. You seem to have cut right through to Ford's real point iin this movie. Nice job!* What? Huh? What?! Me? Are you sure you're not confusing my words for Miss G's? But I thank you for those very sweet words. *Here's what Michael Powell said about making movies, I just read it and it reminded me so much of our talks here, especially the ones about Ford:* * Well, I've always been a very serious-minded person, but people don't know it, really, they're always puzzled by my films, that there's usually something going on in the film besides what you're looking at, which is of course, the contact with the director, an audience has a contact with the story on the screen and also with the director who is telling the story. This is why a director in making a film is such a strange thing - there are some directors who are just card indexes, machines, just put the thing very well on the screen and that's it. But there are others, who are holding an unspoken communication with the audience all the time, and I'm one of those, and the audience is saying "Well, there's something going on" - I've had this said to me - "There's things going on in your films, particularly in this sequence, which I didn't understand but it fascinated me" and I didn't say anything - what it is, is the direct contact with the audience with the director.* * *Michael Powell* Now that is awesome. I'm in complete agreement with Powell. The best directors are making their films. It's their thoughts and feelings up on the screen. It's their personality that you will find. The ordinary directors just do what they are told. It's a job for them. I like that Powell calls himself a "very serious-minded person." That shows he cares. I just recently watched my very first Powell-Pressburger film and I was very moved by the filmmaking. You could tell it was different than most. It was poetic. And John Ford certainly places himself in his films. He plays multiple characters in his films. *On a different note, I watched Love Affair (which I like just marginally better than An Affair to Remember) the other night, but with the sound off, because everyone here was asleep but me. I found it really really fascinating - there are things going on between Boyer and Dunne - quite clear even at their at their first meeting - little personal touches, unspoken communication, body language if you will, that I never noticed before. Something about him stops her, a **** of her head, a swivel of her eyes back toward him that shows interest .... Boyer turns away, registers slight shock, then approval, cracking up at what she says. It's charming! There's a little something extra happening through it all that totally captivated me. Something that I was distracted from by the words. I am not saying that this doesn't happen in the other movie. I just noticed it and thought I would throw it out for discussion.* That's excellent, Jackie. Love really is an unspoken language all its own. The body tells a story. By the way, I thought "your" film was a re-telling of a Ford film.

Ciao, Snippy -- *Maybe you should see* *The Grass is Greener one of these days, to see Cary with Deborah in another comedy, and as an old married couple.* I will definitely do so. The only problem right now is that I let my aunt borrow that Cary Grant collection. How do, Quiet Gal -- *I am likely going to need to turn in my "classic movie chick flick" membership card when I say this..ha.. but neither of these movies would rate TOO high on a favorites list for me (over all)* That doesn't surprise me. I don't see you as a "chick flick" gal. Meanwhile, *An Affair to Remember* is #61 on my all-time list and I cry a few times during the film. So what does that say about me? *But.. Ha.. here's a "news flash" for you.. . I prefer the opposite of what you did (go figure, ha) :-)Because I like Boyer and Dunne a bit more than Grant and Kerr.. Or maybe it is just this version of the MOVIE that I like more.. not sure which it is...* On this board, I'd say the majority would choose Boyer and Dunne over Grant and Kerr. I really do like both pairings. I wasn't sure how Irene Dunne would be with me, but she was very good. I'm a Boyer fan, so I knew he could match Cary.

*There's a little TCM featurette that shows that McCarey nearly remade it shot for shot. So if it is not which you saw first it may boil down to which stars you like the best.* I didn't catch that featurette. That's interesting. It sure felt like he just re-shot the original. As for the stars, they are very close, with me. I slightly prefer Cary Grant and Deborah Kerr over Charles Boyer and Irene Dunne. But even they play similarly. It's quite remarkable.

*oh, how could i forget mitch. he's at the top. then ryan, the payne, then sterling.* I like that Sterling is included. I always think of Mitch as being the "John Wayne of film noir." *payne is great with fight scenes. like i said, he is very realistic at looking beat up.* He really is. He does take a good beating, but he can dish one out, too. You often "feel" his fights.

*I quite agree. In fact, after Robert Ryan he's probably my favorite "noir" actor...and Sterling Hayden. He's very different to the other two...more like someone you'd be more likely to meet.* Now that's high praise! I'm rather new to John Payne. He's been a big surprise for me. I do believe he deserves mention with my faves: Robert Ryan, Robert Mitchum, Richard Widmark, Dana Andrews. Payne is the most "physical" of those guys, though. And he just explodes.

Hey there, Shady -- *I think I liked just the whole feel of the movie.* I did, as well. I liked the backdrop of "Mexico." *I even liked how (oh you are going to LOVE this..ha.) how GRAY (I mean grey!) it is in some of its themes. And yet not so grey because I really do feel he is TOTALLY "black and white" in terms of his "righteous anger" and wanting to find out who had used him so he could clear his name (or WAS that his real reason after all??? ha)* You're right. It's a theme that is often found in westerns. *There were a lot of layers to this story once you really settled in to watch. He starts out at this hardly noticable character (very much in the background, even though he is right out in front making his deliveries) and you never even THINK he will have anything much to do w/ the story at all.. and then.. the next thing you know, its all about HIM. I liked that.* That's pretty much film noir. He's unknowingly caught up in a "storm." Fate. *did you know I actually was at Union Station twice this year already?? (the building that is pictured at the start of the movie)* I didn't know that was Union Station. That's really cool that it's still around and looks similar. *So.. aside from all the realistic warnings about all the "shady" folks from KC, ha, What else did YOU like??* John Payne, first and foremost. I think he's at his best in this one. He's sensational. I love the story and how it all comes together and the twists. I really enjoyed Preston Foster as "Mr. Big." It's a really good role and performance. When we first see him, he's nasty. Then we see him as "dad." Quite a turn. And how about that gang? Can you find a better group of mugs than Jack Elam, Neville Brand, and Lee Van Cleef? Wow! But John Payne is so doggone good in *Kansas City Confidential*. He's the kind of guy I love watching in film noir. I think he's severely underrated.

*so how do you think* *love affair compares with* *an affair to remember?* Since I saw *An Affair to Remember* first, I felt a little strange watching *Love Affair*. Why? Because everything plays out the same. There's hardly a single deviation. I prefer the 50s remake, mainly because I saw it first. But I also felt the scenes in the remake were a little longer, which gave them a little more emotional impact. I think both are terrific movies, though.

*he does, but he also does with his pa and his C.O. and everyone, really, don't you think.* Oh, completely. I have agreed with all you have written. You've been right on target. Marty wants to speak up and show a backbone but he cares about others too much to place himself first.

*I think it started to "go off" for Martin long before Mary even came on the scene.* Yeah, but she prevented him from doing quite a few things, too! Marty really does defer. *I loved his reaction when he first arrives. It's actually the funniest moment in the whole movie to me. That West Point is being compared to an insane asylum tickles me to no end.* You're silly. *But what's interesting, is that in some rather serious, sad way, West Point is a prison and drives Marty mad at times. It seems to him that the parade of life is continually passing him by. But like a certain TV character once pointed out, it's an "institution" that either is a prison keeping you from all you want, or it's a haven that holds in all that's dear. This moment very subtly sets up all that's ahead.* That's beautiful. It's very true. I can relate to Marty with this. *Marty is ultimately an individualist, and how a "maverick" fits into a rigid community is a favorite theme of Ford. This time the "hero" is played gently for humor, rather than pure tragedy.* Nice call. You are very right about this. Marty really is a "maverick." He just happens to be a gentle one. He's not Ethan Edwards.

*Because you've hated so many of them, especially the funnier ones.* You only imagine that I hate them! *It's all about the characters, about the family, and this movie has the added human richness of a family within a larger "family".* Precisely. *My favorite "theme" in the movie? How Marty never gets his way not even once in his life...and yet he's a "rich" man for it. He never can smoke his pipe, choose his career, choose his country (he wants to return to Ireland and run a pub), choose his service (he wants to go off to war), or almost anything. He gets the woman of his choice but then the Kohlers seemed to know she was the one for him even before he did and engineered their whole courtship. :)Saddest of all, he loses his own son and isn't allowed to wallow in his grief at the bar.* *At every turn he's thwarted, and yet it's never out of anything but affection. He's a "loser" in only his own eyes. Everyone, including Ward Bond (love his character) wants what's best for him and they want him near, too.* Wow! That's superb! I certainly didn't think of that. I thought you were gonna say he can never get his way because of Mary. Which would be true!

So what did you like the best about *Kansas City Confidential*, Quiet Gal? I liked the message of the film: don't trust anyone from the Kansas City area.

*i never would have believed you could tolerate* *the long gray line let alone put it so highly. it's even taken me several vieiwings to feel affectionate toward it.* You always make me smile when I see you list the Ford film as the one I like the least. It's a really good film. It's very warm. Oh, Mary O'Donnell! And Pa Maher is a riot.

*You're right. The tone is quite different. The charm we find in "Chips" is the melting away of the man as he gets older and the change based on the impact Greer has on his life.* That's correct. There's a "Scrooge" effect at play in *Goodbye, Mr. Chips*. This is different in *The Long Gray Line*. Marty (Tyrone Power) is liked by most, right from the start. And maybe that's why I enjoy the film more, too. I really like Marty. I love how frustrated and angry he gets with Mary (Maureen O'Hara). *Though essential to the story it does lose a good deal of the life of it after Greer is gone.* That's how I felt. Greer is that fresh mountain air. Once she leaves, the story loses that freshness. *Power's "Marty" already has that Irish-ness about him. Through different civrumstances both characters arrive at a similar point in how they are respected.* You've got it. *The Long Gray Line* is a lot "looser" than *Goodbye, Mr. Chips*, and those who like the heavier story of "Chips" may struggle with the looseness in "Gray.". It had the opposite effect on me. It made the story far more accessible and enjoyable to me. *I think Ford's tone with "How Green Was My Valley" may be closer to "Chips" in that people are more formal there.* I'd agree with that. Although, Donald Crisp and Sara Allgood provide some much needed fire and heart in *How Green was My Valley*. That's the "Irish" coming out. It's 100 degrees with a "feels like" of 113 in Harrisburg. Oh, my.

*I never thought of it as "Goodbye Mr. Chips." Now that you mention it though the basic story is there. Now, I'll have to have my bride watch it because she loves "Chips."* There are shared scenes and moments with the films. The whole premise is the same: a man giving his life to a school, thus he ends up teaching generations of men from the same families. The two World Wars play a significant role in each. While I don't like *Goodbye, Mr. Chips* hardly at all (except for Greer), I came away liking *The Long Gray Line*. It's all about the tone with me. *Goodbye, Mr. Chips* is much more restrained; very British. *The Long Gray Line* is Irish-American, so it's full of bluster and life. The British reaction to comedy is a chuckle while the Irish-American comedy is more of a belly laugh. I prefer the Irish-American way. *You really surprised me with this one. Like, Ro, I'm lousy at guessing but I should know you better.* The group of films I watched should have been difficult to guess with me. There wasn't too much "me" in this group. But I found some surprises.

*Now I have to get "The Sniper."* It's rather startling when you consider the time it was made. The psychology in the film dates it, though. *What did you like about "Gray Line"?* All of it, pretty much. Ford basically remade *Goodbye, Mr. Chips*. I greatly prefer Ford's telling. Lots of wonderful emotion. I cried a few times. Just like you, I loved Maureen O'Hara and Donald Crisp. Their presence elevates the film, immensely. *Goodbye, Mr. Chips* lacks such warm characters once Greer Garson disappears. And I thought this was Tyrone Power's best perfomance of the ones of his I have seen. He puts on a show. *And not like about "Blondes"?* I really enjoyed the pairing of Jane and Marilyn. I liked them a lot. In fact, it made me like Jane again. The story doesn't do a thing for me, though. I'm not into that world, nor have I ever wished to be nor do I ever wish to be. My favorite scene is "When Love Goes Wrong." Well, other than the "pants" scene.

Here's how I liked them: 1. The Sniper (2) 2. Western Union (1) 3. Love Affair (5) 4. The Long Gray Line (15) 5. The Murderous Corpse (Fantomas III) (3) 6. Death of a Scoundrel (6) 7. Man of the World (12) 8. Road House (8) 9. The Divorce of Lady X (7) 10. Hatari! (13) 11. The Swan (11) 12. Waltzes from Vienna (4) 13. Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (14) 14. Wedding Present (10) 15. Doubting Thomas (9)

*Gentleman Prefer Blondes - (didn't like it. Sleazy.)* That made me laugh! I don't think I've ever seen you use the word "sleazy" with a movie before. Especially one such as that! *The Long Gray Line - (Hey, it's Ford.)* That's the problem! So of the seven you have seen, what's your favorite?

How many of the 15 films have you seen, Movieman?