FrankGrimes
-
Posts
10,876 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by FrankGrimes
-
-
Most certainly. That's probably why I tend to most admire the work of directors who started out in silents (even though I love "talky" pictures, too).
I actually love silent sequences in talkies a lot. "Silence" draws me in. Unspoken languages often affect me more than spoken ones. The Searchers is full of unspoken language. In fact, I believe the unspoken language is much better than the spoken. I think those who don't like The Searchers tend to be those who don't hear such languages that well. They value the spoken more. "Laurie" is the character in the film whose spoken language affects me the most.
-
Fascinating! So Ford did take the dramatic closing scene from the book, it's just that the scene comes earlier in the book.
Not much earliler, this was in the last chapter.
Ahhhhh... very good.
SPOILER!!!
And it was right at that moment that Martie fatally plugs him because he thinks the girl is Debbie, too, and that Amos is going to kill her.
Wow! That's quite a different ending. I definitely like Ford's more. His is more poetic.
The reason I say I kind of like LeMay's ending with Martie/Debbie is because of the way it's written. It's quite haunting and beautiful but simple. In fact, so's the whole book. I'm very glad to have read it.
You are glad to have read a fictional book, eh? I'll have to file that one away for future reference.
And yes, I think the right "look" was extremely important to Ford. He saw things like a painter would.
I believe the greatest directors value the look and feel of their film above else.
-
I've started to notice how Ford sometimes picks actors for their physicality. The way they move, stand, use their whole bodies, not just their faces or dialogue to convey emotion. That's why you often see important emotional moment played by a performer with their back to the camera, with an averted or even completely hidden face...Sometimes these postures can be more moving than a closeup of an anguished face which is what less creative directors would choose to do.
I haven't seen nearly enough Ford films to make a worthy comment on such a thing, but you most definitely can and I have noticed what you speak of. One thing you have written about Ford and Maureen O'Hara is that he really liked her eyes more so than her ability at the outset. That tells you Ford sought a look and feel for his films.
One other thing I noticed in the book that was interestingly transferred to the movie: during the raid on Scar's village Ethan/Amos is chasing the Indian girl he thinks is Debbie (he's on horseback and she's running) and he has his gun on her and just as he's about to pull the trigger, the book says he "unexpectedly" switches the gun to his rein hand and reaches out to pluck up the girl. The girl turns out to be an Apache maid, not Debbie, but how interestingly this turned into the chase into the cave!
Fascinating! So Ford did take the dramatic closing scene from the book, it's just that the scene comes earlier in the book.
-
That's one spell I don't intend to ever give you the antidote to.
We'll see about that.
Simple but effective. One could say the same about John Wayne, although I'm starting to believe his performances were complex more so than simple.
Can you elaborate? Because I'm not sure if I agree. And I don't mean that disparagingly to his acting prowess, it's just that I think his straightforward characters are very effective, as much as another actor's more complex ones. Just different. But if I'm missing something I'd like to know.
On the surface, Wayne's performances in Ford films look to be very straightforward, but I believe there's much more beneath the surface. It's one thing for Wayne to say, "that'll be the day," or "pilgrim," it's another for him to display emotion and, more importantly, hide emotion. Wayne's characters don't always speak what they feel. They are emotionally hiding and I think Wayne shows this with his acting. My appreciation for his abililty as an actor has soared for this very reason. I give a lot of credit to Ford for extracting this from Wayne, too.
-
You have seen every Pride and Prejudice, ButterscotchLIZA? Could you talk about what you like and dislike about each of them. I have yet to see any of them nor do I plan on watching any of them, but I'd love to hear your opinions.
-
I finally finished reading The Searchers last night.
It's about time! I've read three books in the same amount of time.
What kind of books? I shall not say or know.I like the ending ...and this is a major SPOILER for anyone who plans to read the book....which is rather romantic because Martie ends up with Debbie while Laurie (poor thing) married Charlie MacCorry after all. Haw haw haw!
That's very interesting on many levels, although it could be viewed as creepy, too.
As good as the book is, and it's very good, I can appreciate how Ford turned it into something great. He is vastly more wise at handling and developing character than LeMay was. LeMay provided a great "skeleton" and a trace work for interesting characters. Ford added dimensions and layers that LeMay apparently never dreamed of.
From what you have shared with us about the book, I totally agree with you. Surprising, non? Ford's The Searchers is very layered and exceptionally rich, especially character-wise. What I'm most impressed by with Ford is how carefully developed his characters are, especially from an emotional point of view. Okay, now remove the spell from me. Free me!
It's quite remarkable how much of the dialogue in the movie was lifted straight from the book.
That is rather remarkable considering the changes Ford made.
But the 'signature' line that Wayne speaks is not in the book: "That'll be the day"
Simple but effective. One could say the same about John Wayne, although I'm starting to believe his performances were complex more so than simple.
-
What's up, Liveliest Gal in Town -- You're a big troublemaker, CineBabe. That's why I like you, girl.
Thanks for the love, Love.Hi, Ava -- I'm curious to see some of Frankie's films in May. I like Sinatra as an actor. I think he's underrated.
-
Let's Play One Hundred Sixty Two, ChiOuch! -- Dear
Frank-We-Wish-the-Cubs-Could-Play-the-Bucs-All-Season-Grimes:
So does every other team in the league.
Unlike many of your so-called friends, I have not participated in this sleazy
little game of torturing you.
Thanks for the friendship... and the knife in my back. Friends don't torture, they
kill quick.
I now, as a friend and compatriot, turn to you for advice.
If you are turning to me for advice, you are bleeding from the head. One should
never turn to a dead man for advice.
Which one of the following classes should I take this summer at Facets Multimedia?
Ingmar Bergman: Scenes from a Marriage and Beyond
Watch the Skies!: Science Fiction, 1950's and Us
Ford at Fox: The Emergence of a Hollywood Master
Silent Shadows: The Films of F.W. Murnau
Damn you! You are a lucky S.O.B.! A man with a lovely wife and lovely daughters
should not be allowed to have his film cake and eat it, too. No way. You know
darn well what my knee-jerk selection would be. I don't even have to tell you.
What I'd like to know is, how many Bergman, Ford (Fox), and Murnau films have
you seen recently (last few years)? The reason I ask is because I think you would
appreciate and gain the most from a class on the director you have seen the
least of their work featured. In terms of your personal taste, I'd surely say
Murnau. If this dead man's memory serves correctly, we both consider Murnau
to be the greatest director in cinematic history. Murnau was also very influential
on the kind of films we both like: visually dark.
I don't see you being a Sci-Fi guy, but I could be very mistaken about this since
you are someone who understands and values social and political allegories. The
best part of that class would be its emphasis on how the Cold War helped launch
the sci-fi genre in America. It's interesting how sci-fi can be viewed as both Left and
Right.
Without knowing the answers to some of my questions, I'm going to say Murnau is
definitely the class for you, but I would not put it past you choosing the Ford class.
I'd have to know what films are being shown in the Bergman class..
Hi, Lynn, dear! -- Anybody else want to throw in?
So you are down with an F.W. Murnau film class?
-
Yes it does. And I shall cry into my pillow tonight over his treacherous behavior toward us.
-
I think "LIZA" has something to say about you both...
-
What's the score, Molo -- I found both Earle (Robert Ryan) and Johnny (Harry Belafonte) to be sympathetic at their lowest moments, but they both turned to arrogance and anger when confronting their emotional pain, thusly pushing them away from their women and us, the audience.
I can see that. In Earle (Ryan) particularly because he just has that look of a beaten man. Johnny's actions in the club after he's roughed up when he goes on stage while the lady's singing just kind of made me say "what a jerk" "pull yourself together and do something about it", but I say the same thing about people I know today. Life and people just don't work that way. It's important to "get that". The pain is very human and understandable but the way they react to it is harder to understand but it's no less real and must be considered.
I completely agree with you. I think many people make the mistake of thinking all characters in film should act and behave as they would in a situation. I don't like to view films this way, though. I find it to be more compelling when characters are different than I.
Sometimes when I'm watching a movie like this one I'll get stuck on one aspect and start pondering it and then miss something else important. Reading your comments has brought it back into focus for me. Ruth's actions are justified but I can see their effect on Johnny's frame of mind. That's a great point about Ruth playing the odds.
Johnny wants to keep all of his joys in life (read: vices) but Ruth is telling him that he cannot do this. He must surrender his destructive side if he's to have a future with her and Eadie. If Johnny truly wanted to be with them, he could, because it's quite obvious that Ruth's door remains wide open for him. But Johnny is always looking for the quick fix, the easy way out.
So you're a softy, Molo? Very good.
A little bit. Not as much as you might think and mainly in private. What melts ole Molo's heart are damaged people, especially if they don't really know they're damaged. It's hard for me to explain. Gloria's Helen seemed like one of those people to me anyway.
We're not that far off then. I tend to fall for girls who are hurting. I also like very emotional girls. Helen (Gloria Grahame) falls into the "hurting" class due to neglect. Strangely, that's not what attracts me to her. I'm very selfish when it comes to her. It's all sexual.
You deserve to be with Gloria because of your concern for her. My mind is always in the gutter with Gloria. I'm using her just like Earle. She deserves better.
Aw but Frank, maybe Helen but not the Gloria Grahame. She doesn't want concern. She knows where your mind is at and that's okay as long as it suits her.
You may be right about that. I really haven't researched Gloria's life away from screen that much, so I don't have a good idea about her personality. Actually, I don't research the off-screen lives of any star. It just doesn't appeal to me. I believe this places me in the minority on this board. All I care about is their performances on the screen.
Maybe you're more like Bogie while I'm more Franchot Tone. I dream of Grahame, Lupino, Russell and Sheridan but I'll probably end up with Alice Faye.
I wish I were like Bogie. No, I'd be the sucker who gets used by any femme fatale that crossed my path. Although, I'd probably give it back pretty darn good after a while. It wouldn't be pretty.
I like all of those dames, but Gloria takes the cake. Of the five you named, Ida Lupino is the one I'd love to be with the most, though. She was brilliant.
At best I aspire to my main man Mitchum but he never quite gained the upper hand with his women did he?
Does any man ever gain the upper hand with a woman?
Anyway, I thought it was decided that Carole Lombard was your main squeeze.
Of the actresses that attract me, she'd be the one I'd marry. I think she would be the best at providing stimulation (of all kinds), relaxation, friendship, loyalty, and love. Those are the most important things to me.
Ciao, CineBabe -- You both write so well. Nope, I'm not sucking up. I've really been enjoying reading your exchange.
Thanks, Lively Gal.
Now, you've prettied up your talk on Double G becuz there are ladies reading this thread. So tell me...what are your REAL thoughts on Gloria Grahame. Gimme the locker room version.
I've been on record as stating that Gloria Grahame equals sexuality to me. Her and Claudia Cardinale are the two actresses that bring out my sexual side the most. I really cannot place why Gloria does this to me other than to say she does. It's rather primal. If anything, it is how she looks at a man. Her looks speak a sexual language to me. It has nothing to do with her curves.
Like I mentioned earlier on this thread and on other threads, I consider Grace Kelly to be the most beautiful actress ever with Gene Tierney a close second. They are more beautiful than Gloria Grahame. If all three were to walk into a room at the same time my eyes would immediately go to Grace first and then Gene then Gloria. But over the course of the evening, my eyes would slowly start to leave Grace, they would keep checking out Gene, and they would start to get cozy with Gloria. Eventually, my eyes would never leave Gloria.
The unspoken language is heard and felt by both sexes and it pulls each in for various reasons. I hear and feel Gloria's unspoken language loud and clear.
Well now, I think Frank had better go first. He's been busy down in the Films and Filmmakers forum flirting with all the ladies.
Do wrongheaded, pushy, snippy girls qualify as "ladies"? -
Time to clean your inbox out, Scott; it's a bit dirty.
Sorry! I just wish y'all would stop sending me all these darn Coop photos. I get the
point, he's a man who looks pretty in make-up. I agree with you!
-
Westerns are in costumes and have damsels in distress.
And I love superhero stuff, which features silly costumes and damsels in
distress.
There's an edge to westerns that I don't believe exists in "swashies," and
costumes do play a role in that. A guy just doesn't look all that tough wearing
frilly stuff. And I don't want to read words like "dashing." Blah! The dashing
"Ethan Edwards." The gallant "Skip McCoy." Such elegant men.
Noirs just have men in distress.
Damn straight. And what's usually the cause of those men in distress, Miss
Femme Fatale?
I think you just mean you don't like European costumes. That's very xenophobic
of you.
I like young French women in swimsuits.
-
That works for me. I'm all for badgering.
Yes, Theresa and I have the marks to prove it!
What are you talking about?! I'm nothing but a gentleman with you two. I call you the sweetest of names and I'm constantly giving you bouquets of compliments. I feel so unappreciated.
So which other Tyrone Power have you seen, besides Nightmare Alley?
The Razor's Edge, Silly Goose. As you know, I didn't like the film all that much because of Power's "Larry Darrell."
I would have thought you'd jump to see Gene in a grass skirt.
You would think, but I have held off and held off and held off. I've been too busy watching trashy films. The shame of it all. I have learned one thing though, you don't want Greer Garson to fall in love with you because she'll put an ocean between you and her. She's super frigid.
The Mark of Zorro is on my radar. I wonder why... I can't see me getting into "swashies," as you call them. But who knows, I may be surprised.
I wonder why, too. A certain Miss Darnell maybe? She's ravishingly beautiful in it, for sure.
Now why did you have to say that to me? Damn you!
Many guys like the swashies because of all the action (violence and blood! blood and swash!) and the ones I named are the most spectacular and well directed. The Mark of Zorro is extra good because Ty gets to play two characters, one that's so foppish he's hilarious and the other being the serious hero; so he gets to really act for a change at that point in his career.
I'm just not into the costumey films that much and sword fighting just ain't that thrilling to me unless Darth Vader is the villain. I'm wondering if women like "swashies" a little more than men. It seems like they are very "damsel in distress" storybook stuff. Film noir, westerns, war, and horror pics are the classic films I tend to associate with men the most.
Son of Fury just barely qualifies as a swashbuckler in my opinion. To me, it's more a historical drama and a good one.
I will be entering my viewing thinking it's not a "swashie."
I think I have only seen Nightmare Alley and The Razor's Edge. I do not like Ty's "Larry Darrell" except for his philosophy on life.
I like Gene's character the best, and her Uncle Elliot. Ann Baxter is also very good.
Gene is definitely my favorite in the film. She's the reason why I find the film to be okay. I also like Lucile Watson.
Ty just looks gorgeous but he's very "remote". It's not an easy character to portray, and frankly the book doesn't make him any more defined or delineated. He seems more like a walking symbol of "the search for self" than a real person.
The minute he goes on his journey, the film goes south for me. He basically becomes an empty suit to me. I love his philosophy on life, but my goodness, does he need to be such a bore? I enjoy "Isabel's" selfishness and childishness the most. I eat that kind of stuff up, especially from Gene.
I loved your photo-quotes! I love when you do that.
-
I'm not so crazy about Nightmare Alley as most are.
That doesn't surprise me in the least. You are too girly-girl to appreciate the dark.
I find the most interesting characters to be Ian Keith and Joan Blondell's.
Joan Blondell is my favorite in the film but I also like Coleen Gray, who reminds me of Sweet T. Without checking Ty's filmography (Goddess lazy), I think I have only seen Nightmare Alley and The Razor's Edge. I do not like Ty's "Larry Darrell" except for his philosophy on life.
But then, I've only seen it once and I might like it more the next time. I guess because I found Ty's character very "cold" and I'm just not used to seeing him that way.
A big component to film noir is the loss of self and mind, especially from a man's point of view. "Stanton Carlisle" is a shining example of such losses.
I love the picture of Maureen O'Hara. I just love her wild hair. Perfect.
-
I have The Black Swan. It's a fun, entertaining swashie, full of humor and sassy lines between him and Maureen. I think they had great chemistry together. I love they way he badgers her to call him "Jamie boy" while she hates the very sight of him. Too funny.
That works for me. I'm all for badgering.
What did you think of Son of Fury? It's almost in the Pride and Prejudice category. There's even a fancy dress ball.
I haven't watched it yet. I don't even have to tell you how I'm pathetic I am because you do a good job of reminding me of that fact.
The BEST swashbuckler I've ever seen, though is Captain Blood. I like it even better than The Adventures of Robin Hood or The Sea Hawk, though they are great films, too, beautifully produced and superbly directed by Curtiz. Tyrone's best swashie was not in that set you bought, The Mark of Zorro. No one will ever be a better "Zorro" to me than Ty.
The Mark of Zorro is on my radar. I wonder why...
I can't see me getting into "swashies," as you call them. But who knows, I may be surprised. -
Hey there, FXReyMan! -- I'd have to disagree with your opinion of Day-Lewis in "There Will Be Blood".
You're not allowed to do that.
His performance was good, may have even qualified him for the Oscar this year. But this is no where near one of his better performances. His Oscar win for "My Left Foot" was much more deserving. He is one of our better, more committed actors we have working today. Although not as prolific as "classic" movie actors once were.
Day-Lewis deserves much praise for his performance in BOTH My Left Foot and There Will Be Blood. Talk about opposite ends of the acting spectrum, and he deftly achieves great success in each. I consider There Will Be Blood to be more of a powerhouse role for Day-Lewis but My Left Foot to be the greater challenge. What Day-Lewis had to do in There Will Be Blood was take command of the screen and he surely did that and then some. I couldn't take my eyes AND ears off of him. How he was able to consistently speak in his John Huston-esque style while delivering such forceful, lengthy monologues is beyond me. There Will Be Blood provided Day-Lewis with what could be a once in a lifetime opportunity for an actor and he capitalized on it.
And I prefer "No Country For Old Men" much better as well. A visual powerhouse of not only storytelling but visuals as well. Plus a great supporting cast. Just loved Josh Brolin, Tommy Lee Jones and Javier Bardem. Bardem was rather creepy, but he was excellent. I had always considered "Fargo" to be their best film. I'd really have to say that this film is by far their best film to date.
Fargo and Blood Simple were my two favorite Coen Brothers' films until No Country for Old Men came along. No Country for Old Men is a very tense film. I was on the edge of my seat throughout the picture, fearing the worst. It's a very well-acted film, as most Coen brothers films are. "Anton Chigurh" (Javier Bardem) is on the level of "Max Cady" for me. He terrified me.
In many ways I see "No Country for Old Men" as a revisitation to themes from earlier Coen brother films like Blood Simple and Fargo. The film's motifs of chance, free-will, and predestination are familiar territory for the Coen Brothers, who presented similar threads and themes of fate and circumstance in those earlier works. I especially loved Chigurh's (Bardem) fate deciding coin flipping.
Very nicely said. I completely agree with you. I believe No Country for Old Men successfully combines elements from Blood Simple with Fargo. I also consider No Country for Old Men to be the most philosophical of the Coen Brothers films. I love the ending for this very reason. We are left with a thought.
-
That dvd was indeed expensive---which is why I bought it during the last deepdiscount sale.
If it would show up at my Borders, I'd probably get it. I highly doubt it will show, though, so I'm gonna have to order it on-line and I'll wait until the sale.
TLGL took me quite by surprise. I didn't think so much of it when I first saw it years ago (like a lot of Ford's films). Now I find it rather remarkable for many reasons, and more and more so as I return to it. There are some moments of genuine beauty and it's Power's finest hour as an actor. He's a real character and nothing at all like what we've seen before. He plays a "little" man, a very, very ordinary man---and as always, Ford helps us find along with the failures, the good things about a very ordinary man. Maureen, too, is splendid. The story's based on a real person.
At the rate I'm going, I could have about 20 Ty Power films on DVD. I think I've only seen two of his films to date, though. Yes, I know I'm pathetic. I love Power in Nightmare Alley. I wish I could see more of that Power, but I know I won't. I've been thinking about getting The Black Swan because of Maureen O'Hara.
-
Those are wonderful! Thanks for posting them.
-
He practically was "born in a trunk" or on the stage so acting was in his blood and his birthright. He wanted to do more stage work and to be a real "actor", not a matinee idol. I have always sensed this yearning even in some of his early roles...as though he were trying terribly hard to make good. I find this very attractive about him.
This is why I said I enjoy reading your honest opinions and your shared knowledge. I told you that I wasn't a phony.
I'm probably going to get The Long Grey Line later this year; maybe during the Deep Discount sale. It's an expensive DVD. I was impressed that Ken listed the film very high on his favorite Ford films list. I also like that "little red-headed lassie."
-
No, I can't recall her mentioning it---but I feel certain she must have.
That's a good bet.
I thought about her as I watched it because it was rather poignant to see Tyrone looking more relaxed and comfortable in his skin than ever before in his life. I sense in many ways he was a man coming into his own in his life---personally and professionally---only it was snuffed out before he could enjoy it long. After seeing his work for Ford in The Long Gray Line I could see he had truly great things to look forward to, because he'd have eagerly reached out for the kind of character parts he could sink his teeth into---and gladly shed himself of his glamour boy days.
What I know of Tyrone Power is from Chandler on this board. I really love her passion for Power and I'm glad she has had success in sharing her wonderful knowledge of the man. What Chandler wrote about Power that stuck with me the most was how he wanted to break away from all the uninspiring roles he was receiving at Fox. He wanted to become more of a complete actor than just a one-trick pretty boy. I'm guessing he would have received his wish if he hadn't died at such a young age. It's very depressing.
I loved the photos you posted, especially the one with his daughters. Very sweet.
-
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on The Rising of the Moon, Miss G. Do you know if Chandler has seen it?
-
For heavens' sake, that's not snobbery, it's dancing! A country dance! You should appreciate that, aren't you a country boy?
It's snobby dancing to the highest degree.
I'm a suburban softy. My mom grew up in the "country" and my dad grew up in the "city," so I got a little taste of both worlds. I'm more familiar with country folks than city folks.
Here's a country dance...
-
A great favorite of mine is Claire Trevor's narration over a haunting theremin in Anthony Mann's Raw Deal.
"In my heart, I know that this is right for Joe. This is what he wanted."
What kind of books? I shall not say or know.
Do wrongheaded, pushy, snippy girls qualify as "ladies"?
Alfred Hitchcock's Rebecca
in General Discussions
Posted
My feelings are that "Rebecca" and "Now Voyager" are two films that deal with common female insecurity issues, making them very popular with the ladies.
Very well said, Tiki. I wholeheartedly agree with you. I also believe the popularity of the film is very much due to the popularity of the novel. "Rebecca" is a book many women have read and will read for years to come.
Rebecca is a solid Hitch film for me. I like the gothic look and atmosphere of the film, Joan Fontaine's emotional peformance, and the supporting peformances by Judith Anderson, George Sanders, and Florence Bates. I'm not into the story that much and Laurence Olivier doesn't do much for me in the film. I also don't consider Rebecca to be a true Hitch vision. I wish that it were.