JackFavell
-
Posts
14,349 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by JackFavell
-
-
Hey! I've seen that one! I think Maven has too, she's a big fan of Gail Patrick, Jack LaRue and now Esther Ralston, we both thought Ralston was darn good and wondered why she didn't make many more sound movies. A victim of the casting couch I fear.
I thought certain parts of it were very good indeed, but the plot encompassed too much and too many generations I think. I liked the peaceful father, Ralston, Jack LaRue and Randolph Scott. You are right, he was so smooth faced and young! I kept expecting Gail to give someone a withering glance but she never did - she was so impossibly beautiful in this one as the good sister, it made me wonder what kind of career she would have had if she hadn't been so good at playing the "rival".
Yellow Sky has a lot going for it, it's not perfect by any means, but it's got a great cast, including another good role for Pa Clegg (from Wagon Master).
I'm so happy Chris that they are playing Randy on April 11th.
Would be star and fred, I really love Big Boy, and appreciate the info about him. Glad to hear he was a nice feller as well as good lookin'.
Edited by: JackFavell on Mar 12, 2012 3:46 PM
-
fred -
the cast alone sounds like a dream! I love Porter Hall and Edgar Buchanan, and Claire Trevor is tops in anyone's book. If Big Boy is in it, I'm there. Charles Vidor did right by Glenn in *Gilda*, so I'm going to go check and see if I can rent it. Thanks for the tip!
-
I love both of those, Jeff! Colleen's expression is just so funny!
Both of those are beautiful, I love the colors you selected.
-
> BTW, i hope to get to *Buchanan Rides Alone* by midweek, if it's not too late to discuss. I just finished watching Randy in a movie made twenty years before the BB westerns and his entrance was almost identical to the one in *Comanche Station*, riding in alone among the mountains, leading pack horses.
I'll watch Buchanan this week too, now that I have the set, it's easy to keep up!
What movie was it that had the Comanche Station entrance? He made so many and I haven't yet really gotten into Scott without BB.
I saw *Yellow Sky* this week. Despite the fact that in the first three minutes there were a bunch of stupid things that happened, I really liked it. It's a movie of great style. Maybe style over substance, but at least here is another Gregory Peck movie that I loved. I like that 40's and 50's Wellman look in a movie, the lean high contrast black and white, spare and sun baked or sometimes snow covered.
I'm recording Wellman all day today.
-
The fact that your sentence could convince me that I posted this before tells you how absent minded I can be.
>Yes, I thought maybe it was a gaucho style split skirt, too...I saw Amanda Blake wear one like it in "Gunsmoke" once.
I never thought those 1960's shows actually had costumes based in reality!
-
Did I post this before? I thought I had never seen it - hmm. My poor brain! Maybe I posted it and then forgot to watch it myself! Oh dear.
I was trying to figure out Helen's outfit too. At first I thought it was a skirt, then I thought it had buttons on the outside edges which could loosen up when she got up in the saddle. Now on second viewing I think it was more of a gaucho style pant or split skirt with wide legs, very forward thinking.
>The death by a rock bit reminded me of a Wyle-E-Coyote cartoon!
meep meep!
Edited by: JackFavell on Mar 11, 2012 6:53 PM
-
> THAT'S the older man who was in "The Ox-Bow Incident"???!!!!! Holy-----
I know!!!
> Thanks, Jackie! I posted this at my site. He's very cute. Those chaps! They must have been boiling hot in Texas!
I should have gone to look at your site to check! I knew you probably had already seen it.
And I thought the same thing about those furry pants! It's amazing he didn't pass out.
I wished he _had_ been directing at this point! Death by falling rock seems a tad farfetched. I mean, And he kept trying to inch up the hill... I thought he might do better trying to roll down...
> I love that he pulls out a pipe to smoke instead of a ciggie.
He cracked me up a couple of times with his bits of business like that. And his hat - the way he played with it when Helen was there reminded me of Henry Fonda later in My Darling Clementine. I loved how courtly he was with Helen.
Speaking of Helen, WHAT WAS THE MATTER WITH HER?
"Helen hasn't decided whether she will marry Jim or not"....
Helen, don't be a FOOL!
> What fun, Jackie!! Thanks for posting that link. And what a real treat to see the young Francis Ford too!! And you are right.. am having a hard time seeing the grisled old guy from TQM in that sweet boyish face there, ha.
I think he shrunk over time..... the only thing I recognize is that thick unruly hair!
> Wow, I think that MAY have been one ofhte oldest films I have ever seen. (if not THE oldest) I wonder if 100 yrs ago those guys had any clue that someday down the road I'd be sitting here on my cushy couch with my feet propped up watching them run around out on the Texan landscape. Who knew?? :-)
I think it's kind of cool to be able to see something this old. It's pretty well done for 1911, thanks to the underplaying of the three leads.
The villain, well.... let me just say, he doesn't underplay.
I wish there were more of Francis' early movies that survived.
Those early moviemakers would stand there with mouths agape if they saw us in the privacy of our homes watching on a little computer screen. I hope they would be happy, but I bet hey'd laugh themselves silly at how dumb we are, sitting inside watching a little box when we could be outside doing something.
> This is no Hell's Hinges, but maybe that might be a relief to Frank Grimes
> Hahahahahahahaha.. yes.. well.. there's no accounting for taste, is there? HA.
Taste has nothing to do with it.
-
Jean Arthur
Francis Ford
Francis Lederer
Carole Lombard
Joan Crawford
Norma Shearer
Wallace Beery
-
Hey, I just looked over at the National Film Preservation site and found that they are streaming the recently discovered *Billy and His Pal* (1911) that was found in New Zealand last year.
The film was made by Gaston Melies, who came to the U.S. to keep the Melies Bros. french films from being plagiarized and bootlegged, and then decided to set up shop and make movies of his own in Texas, because it was nice and sunny there.
The film stars a very young and handsome *Francis Ford*, an absolutely beautiful man who seems to have acted very naturalistically for the time (in the two 1910's films I've seen with him). He's exceptionally graceful for a big galoot and wonderful to look at. This was before he started directing.
Hard to believe that this is the same actor who would later sport that white beard and wild white hair.
Oddly, Billy is played by famous early film actress Edith Storey. In the titles, the name is switched to Bobby, as this was released in Australia and for some reason Billy was not deemed appropriate.
This is no *Hell's Hinges*, but maybe that might be a relief to Frank Grimes.
http://www.filmpreservation.org/preserved-films/screening-room/billy-and-his-pal-1911
-
I really love the bottom one, Jeff, with Clara peeking out of the bushes.
That doggie is so darn cute!
-
Hahaha! I love that one! Poor Harold.
-
Oooh, I'm so glad you got to it last night. I really loved what you said about the circular nature of the movie - I just love when a movie does that, but BB is kinda subtle with it, it's not obvious that it's going to be a circular movie.
It iIS a lot like *Man of the West*, landscape wise! I never thought of it. The way each section of the movie deepens along the journey, you get the sense that they are going through something, external and internal and the land reflects it.
The way that the landscape MATTERS to the people within it, how they deal with each other within the context of the land, that's very similar. I like the double challenge that a lot of westerns deal with - men against the land, and also men against each other... *Yellow Sky*, which I finally saw all of, is one where landscape is maybe more important than the people scape.
What sets BB and Mann (and Ford) apart is that they seem to always add an extra modern element - man against the land, man against his enemy, but also man against himself. BB is more leisurely in his exploration, maybe a little more old school, but it's there all the same, that psychology of a man battling his own preconceived ideas, or his past, or his morals, or his very nature.
Edited by: JackFavell on Mar 10, 2012 9:32 AM
-
Oh heck, how about some pics of Guinn 'Big Boy' Williams?
Golly, I love that big lug.
-
Maybe that's where all this wind is coming from.
The solar storm is supposed to be messing with power grids, GPS and other satellite systems.
cue twilight zone theme.....
-
You know what's funny? That Twilight Zone epi is all about a small neighborhood that has a power outage, that could be caused by sun spots or a SOLAR STORM (like the one we are experiencing right now), and the first person they get suspicious of is a guy with insomnia.
-
I should probably watch Lobo first.
it's gonna take me a long time to get through those Claude Akins entries.
-
A Georgia boy!
I never watched the Sheriff Lobo show either, but I remember when it was on, and the commercials, always with Akins large head sticking out through the window of his police car..
I haven't really seen any of the Rios yet. I don't know why, I have no attention span for them.
Edited by: JackFavell on Mar 8, 2012 11:54 AM
-
I'm sure you will have something to say. I just run off at the mouth too much!
Those films are really full of little nuggets to talk about. I am going to be sad when I run out of Boetticher/Scott films.
Edited by: JackFavell on Mar 8, 2012 11:43 AM
-
You liked it? Oh I hope so!
-
I remember that Twilight Zone ep! I'm going to go and re-watch it now. I love finding a "new" old actor to watch and then look up all of their appearances.
-
> {quote:title=MissGoddess wrote:}{quote}I think you're right. He always reminds me of Richard III when he plays villains. I don't know if he ever took on that Shakespearean role, but he should have.
Gosh, I'd be surprised if he hadn't! He seems so steeped in Shakespeare, and especially the thoughtful, but perhaps ugly side of tShakespeare's tragedies. I'd bet he'd make a fantastic Iago!
>
>
> I'm enjoying all the Claudie-love. I've had a "crush" on him since I was little. I used to measure actors by how well they stood up to Matt Dillon and Akins was one of the few who made a compelling adversary on "Gunsmoke". He also was the one man on the show that almost took Miss Kitty away from Matt...and I don't mean by force.
>
> I like him best in roles like this, where he may be bad but he's human and shows some feeling. He's actually like that in "The Monsters are Due on Maple Street"!
I have to go find these now to rent! He really is such a good actor. He's another with that warmth I really go for.
-
>CS is proof not every western needs to be non stop action. I think the relationship between Scott and Akins walks a fine line. They really can't stand each other but there is a healthy respect for each other. They work together just enough to survive the trip but they are not going out of each other's way to make sure it all works out.
I really wanted to address this!
Their needing each other kind of brings out the doppelganger in those Boetticher westerns - the twin aspect of his films. They are both smart enough to know when they need one another, but what will happen when they don't? it adds so much tension to the plot. Some bad guys would just do in Cody right off, not thinking. But we learn to think a little more highly of Lane (Claude Akins) in his protecting Cody at the open field. Will he actually turn out to be a better man than we thought?
-
Maven,
It was Frank who actually made the play on the word "bare". I just picked up the ball and ran with it.
>I don't know if it is Budd, or the genre, or (yes...cue chorus) Randolph Scott. But whatever it is, I have to say - I'm likin' it. I might have to hogtie myself to a saddle (or couch or bed or computer chair) but once I strap in and settle down, I enjoyed the ride to "COMMANCHE STATION" I love when I hear the title of a movie, mentioned in the movie.
I like that too, especially when it's done well, slipped in properly like it was here.
>From what I've seen, and you Western desperadoes aficionadoes can gently put me right, is it a staple of Boetticher's to have a (semi)Rubick's cube of conflict; I mean internal conflict within a conflict? Am I far off the reservation thinking Budd as a many layered thing?
That's what I keep trying to get at myself. Just what is it about those BB westerns that make them so enjoyable? I think it's that they are thoughtful, but not too talky. They are almost blunt when words are spoken, but then it's over and we get back to the silent journey through the landscape. I was going to say of the human soul, but it sounded really corny.
>And his horse is just so dad-blasted beautiful. My gosh that horse!!
I know! I couldn't help but notice him too. I believe that is Stardust, Randy's co-star for more pictures than any other "actor:"
>Claude Akins as LANE. He is a great villain. Smooth operator And doggone it, likeable. I liked him. He wasn't scuzzy like Stephen Boyd or cold and mean and sociopathic as Lee Marvin or menacingly maniacal as Richard Boone. I liked him. Maybe he was unjustly court-martialled. And recently, unjustly pegged as the scalphunter causing the Indian attack at Commanche Station. He was smooth enough to be able to woo the hostage if he wasn't ultimately just a downright lowdown varmint. I enjoyed the jockeying between the two men...their sizing each other, their chess match, their sparring, their healthy and wary respect.
I am not sure he was unjustly pegged as the scalphunter. It seemed to me that he and Cody went way back, and maybe way back, he was into that. I took it for granted that he had them hidden away somewhere.... but again, I am ASSUMING... so maybe he did draw the line at that. But I don't think he would have had any qualms about doing it if he needed cash quick.
>I enjoyed the gentleness of Cody's sidekick/henchmen. Dude, they didn't really want to be there. I haven't seen as many westerns as you guys, but I can't say I've ever seen such gentleness for bad guys. These two (Skip Homeier and Richard Rust) play FRANK and DOBIE. Now, when I first saw these two character actors, I thought "Oh boy, here comes the brat and the mean guy," (thinking of Rust in "WALK ON THE WILD SIDE"), so I held my breath waiting for these two cute baby cobras to snap. But they didn't. And that pleasantly surprised me. I loved their reading the sign. A simple scene, I know. But it touched me; said a lot. We could see one had just that smidgen more of education than the other; how helpful they were to each other. I thought they were brothers at first, but they weren't. I loved their closeness. I loved their chat about not wanting to go through with Lane's dastardly plan and wanting to amount to something. Dobie had doubts, conflicted about what they were about to do...the other, Frank, he was just going to get along. Here's when you big fish might throw me out on my ear, but these two boys made me think of an imagined prequel to "Ride the High Country" - of the way maybe McCrea and Scott related to each other as young men before the movie starts. I know, I may be horribly wrong in saying that, but I haven't seen "..The High Country" in about four-hundred years. Just a thought that passed thru my mind as I watched the movie. In the movie before me, ("CS") I imagined Frank and Dobie to be friends for many many years, sharing a ranch together, having wives and kids. I imagine Dobie'd get Frank to follow his lead and go straight. Fate had other plans as it often does.
I really loved what you said here. And I do see them as being kind of like McCrea and Scott in Ride the High Country. I liked the comparison. It felt right to me, because these boys, in spite of who they were hanging out with, were kind of innocent. I half expected Dobie to blurt out "WORK??" like Maynard G Krebs in an episode of Dobie Gillis. I betcha he wouldn't have found it as hard as he thought it was.
>She plays MRS. LOWE, a woman whose stagecoach was 'carjacked' and she was kidnapped by the Indians. No, I'm afraid she wasn't "spared" by the Indians either, and this is alluded to in the shorthand talk of The Movies. Nancy Gates reminds me of Gene Tierney and Joanne Dru and Nancy Coleman all rolled up into one. Very attractive, and strong. She wasn't the helpless female, but she wasn't like Stanwyck as Annie Oakley with a gun (or a whip). She was somewhere in between. A Woman, mature, wholesomely sexy who's been through the mill. And with this merry foursome she is The Prize. Because I liked Lane, I believed him when he told Cody he was going to try to take Mrs. Lowe from her husband. I know on one hand he was just needling Cody because he could see the attraction between Cody and Mrs. Lowe. But it did take my breath away when I heard Lane tell Mrs. Lowe: "I'd come looking to find you if I had to die in the doing." It didn't sound like just a line, but yeah...I s'pose it was. She is the prize...she is protected, she is desired and ultimately, she is a means to an end. Dead or Alive. I liked her character as well. At the very least, she didn't get in the way of menfolk doing their men thing.
I actually thought she was Nancy Coleman. And again, I think you are spot on in describing her. I hate a woman who can't do anything, and she seemed very capable.
>Not a lot of action? Maybe. I liked the two set-pieces of the Indian attack at Commanche Station and when the Indians were chasing down Cody out in open country. I thought those two pieces were pretty good. Did we need more? Hmmm I dunno. I didn't. And here comes Lane riding to the rescue. He could've let them injuns get Cody. Then he could take Mrs. Lowe back and collect the reward money for himself. But he had some sort of code. He saved Cody. Isn't there something like this in "Lawrence of Arabia? where Lawrence saves a man out in the desert...and then has to kill him?
I didn't notice a dearth of action. It seemed pretty full to me. Maybe because action doesn't matter much to me I didn't notice a lack of it. It all seemed to flow really well, and I liked the pacing. The landscape was beautiful, so there was always something to look at. I liked the way Boetticher used all these locations, some of which are getting familiar to me. This is the best use of location of any of his films, to me anyway - some of them end up in one spot for a little too long a time for me, though that's always the point of it.
I love the fact that Boetticher's main villains mostly do have a code of some kind. It may not be the same as Scott's, but it is another of those things that can muddy the water, making Scott's navigation difficult. It would be very easy for a lesser man to throw in with a Lane... not have such high ideals. Let them go for a little while... but that's pretty much death to you, in that drifty west I spoke of before, where time goes by and suddenly you have nothing to show for yourself but the things you did while you were letting it all slide.
>I really loved these two boys. It caught my heart when Dobie had to leave Frank. And later how he said he missed him. And later when all he had was Frank's saddle. Tsk! A shame.
It was. And I think it's a sign of a good storyteller and a good actor that I missed Frank too.
Re: The Annual FrankGrimes Torture Thread
Posted: Mar 7, 2012 3:38 AM in response to: FrankGrimes in response to: FrankGrimes
Click to report abuse... Click to reply to this thread
It's one of the most involved westerns that I have seen. So many different characters matter. So many different angles. It's extremely heavy.
I love the triangle in that western; the obvious and the not so obvious.
What I found really interesting in Comanche Station is that Cody (Randolph Scott) preempts Lane (Claude Akins) and tells him to get lost. This almost backfires on him. It would have if it wasn't for Dobie (Richard Rust).
That was interesting how it played out. I had a cornily written scenario. What if Dobie rode off to warn Cody...with the same result. Ohhhkay, allllright, so I'm no Burt Kennedy.
Talk about two big egos! Boone's laugh would top Akins. I always think of Boone as being more evil than Akins, too.
I agree, Boone'd have the upper hand. The vibe I get from each actor is: Akins is a good old boy who'll do you wrong. Boone is Shakespeareanly malevolent.
Duryea.......weasly
Widmark...psychotic
Boone would snap their necks in two.
>And then when I saw Mrs. Lowe's (Nancy Gates) situation, I was really stunned. This proves your point, "don't assume." Cody and Mrs. Lowe were one in the same: loyal, dedicated spouses.
>Do you think that Cody's loyalty is now mis-placed...after ten years of searching?
>Ten years. It's like Penelope waiting twenty years for Ulysses. When does loyalty cross over the line to obsession?
Yes, this is what I wondered all the way through the film. You should definitely check out Decision at Sundown.
I think we are to wonder a little at his "obsession" and whether it's simply foolish at this point in time? However, as Frank pointed out, when Mrs. Lowe finally met her husband, I think we are to draw a comparison - showing Cody's search to be not so much foolish, but as only fair and right. There was a benevolent spirit to this film that I really liked. People were kinder and better than I thought they were going to be, all the way through.
If you were his wife, what would you want him to do? If you were he, what would you do? I think I'd go mad until I found out one way or another.
-
Ha! Well, that's funny!
I think he has a short man's bravado. Napoleon type thing. Or maybe it's the widescreen.
The Annual FrankGrimes Torture Thread
in Your Favorites
Posted
>Do you think that Cody's loyalty was now misplaced seeking out his wife ten years after her abduction? When do you think loyalty gives way to obsession?
> I don't think it's obsession in this case though I can see that argument. At least his obsession or mission has benefited many others that he's saved along the way. I ask myself how I'd think of his actions if I were his wife, still alive, held against my will somewhere in that land. I put it this way: wouldn't you want to have some spark of hope left, based on what you know about your man, i.e., that he's the kind who'd never give up on finding you? Does it make the woman obsessive to hold onto hope? Isn't love and therefore loyalty, forever?
>
> In this case, I don't thinks Scott is playing "Scottie".
>
> I also think Boetticher sets up Cody's constancy as a contrast to Lane's values which are up for sale to the highest bidder or based only on satisfying an immediate impulse (sometimes a good impulse, like when he saved Cody's skin, sometimes a bad one, with regard to the young man). Lane is very modern, Cody is like a knight on a mission, a relic, but like Ethan Edwards, it's the kind of man and the only kind that can get that kind of job done (getting captives from the tribes). Cody would probably never be able to live in a city, while Lane would flourish (until he got thrown in jail for wrecking a place or shot by someone's husband).
I find this a VERY interesting subject - is it obsession, or mission, or duty, or love that keeps Scott wandering on? or all of those put together? I wasn't sure that it was ever PROVED that she died, so I think that for him, it was the only thing he could do. If someone saw it happen and came back to tell it, then maybe his 'mission' would be an obsession. As long as there is doubt about her death, then he's simply acting as a devoted husband.
Ethan Edwards most definitely has an obsession with finding Debbie - what is the difference in the two stories? Ethan's 'search' is a twisted one, for it is equal parts hate and guilt. It's proven to be hate because he only wants to find her to kill her. To him, his hatred of Scar and any Indian is so intense that the only way to wipe it from her is in death. I think it's equally guilt because of the way Scar is presented as a mirror image of Ethan. He would wipe himself away with Scar.
But Scott is not filled with hatred. He barters with the Indians, placing himself in death's path abjectly, with humility. He is single minded, not obsessed. . Welll. as I write that, I wonder. Maybe it is obsession, but in a good way. IS there such a thing as a good obsession? I do think that Chris is right, in rescuing those other women, it was like he was offering those deeds up to the heavens to help atone for some guilt he might have felt... Maybe with each one, there was one less woman to be found before he finally found his wife.
I guess I think that if you still feel married to that person who has died, then it is not obsession, it's simply the reality of how you feel. Obsession denotes something sick or not right, and I honestly don't get that vibe in this movie. He's not sitting in his cabin pretending that his wife is there with him. But maybe it's all in how each person individually looks at Scott. I bet Mrs. Lowe didn't think it was obsession, but I also bet that Lane did. It's up to us to draw our own judgements about him.
I don't mean to digress, but the idea of trying to find someone who you thought was gone forever is also particularly valid in the context of the movie *Desire Me* with Greer Garson. It made me think of the opposite side of this idea of obsession.
Garson's husband (Robert Mitchum) has died in a Nazi camp, and another man who knew Mitchum in the concentration camp comes calling, after he escapes. He brings Mitchum back to life for Greer, talking about Mitchum's memories and thoughts of her, which he somehow incorporates into his own lonely personality. Those things draw Garson closer to the man, and he falls in love. After using those memories to steal Mitchum's life, he insists that she is living with ghosts and she falls like a sleepwalker into a relationship with him. Is there a time when one should give up thinking about a person (dead or maybe just gone)? Probably. I think there can be no one answer. It should be an individual thing to decide for oneself. If you had a deeply loving relationship with someone, then I guess I think the answer is no. If your relationship was one-sided, or somehow tainted, well then, maybe it's time to give up on it.
I felt in *Desire Me* that Greer should not have given up hope, and yet, she was told point blank that her husband was dead. If she kept her husband alive by drawing this man close to her, to reap his memories of Mitchum, was she wrong? Perhaps she was. And was the man wrong to fall in love with a memory that another man had that seemed so good and lovely, when all he had was poverty and hatred and evil in life? Perhaps so. Was what they had together based on what each brought to the relationship alone, or on something else entirely? Similarly, is Ethan Edwards searching because he loves Debbie? I've worked my way around this subject, and I guess I come to the conclusion that if _love_ is at the heart of the search or the relationship, then all is well. If not, then it is obsession.