misswonderly3

Is it a prequel to "The Story of Elvis Costello"?

Much as I hate to agree with Nipkow about anything (no offense, Nip?) I do have to say, I don't like Mr. Roberts, and cannot understand why it's so revered by so many old movie fans. It's completely boring to me, last night was the second time I watched it, and it was even drearier and dumber than the first time. I guess it's just not my kind of humour. I like all those actors (Henry Fonda, Jack Lemmon, James Cagney...), but not in this thing. You can tell it's based on a play, and that's almost always a bad sign for me. Although I do have exceptions, I generally dislike movies based on plays - you can almost always tell the movie's source, and often, what works on stage is simply dull and claustrophobic on film. It's all just a lot of shouting and screaming and very very broad slapstick comedy ( which sometimes I like, but not here), that just gets tedious very quickly. I dislike Mr. Roberts so much, I was going to say so on the "I Just Watched" thread. But, despite its being initiated by Nipkow ( probably the first and only time I've ever agreed with him), this one will do.

What's health got to do with it?

It's always a bit off-putting when someone thinks you're male when you're female - or vice -versa. However, I know you were just letting me know, for future reference, that you're a "she". I assumed you were male because of the name "Calvin". It's a nice name for a cat; I too am a cat-lover. (Maybe if Catherine had had a beloved cat or dog -or even parrot !- she might have at least had somewhere to bestow her love without getting pain in return...) Yes, it's probably time to "agree to disagree" and leave this discussion. I don't want it to take over the thread, which, as I acknowledged in my first post here about The Heiress, is not intended as a place for an ongoing discussion of just one movie. Still ! I can't resist one last response to your earlier post, and then I'll let it go (they call me miss "last word" wonderly). With regard to Dr. Sloper wanting to see Catherine before he dies: We'll never know what he wanted to say to her (unless it's covered in the Henry James novel, which I have not as yet read). However, it seems likely to me that he wanted to "make his peace" with her, whatever that might mean to a man like Sloper. I can't agree with people who subscribe to the "they made their bed, let them lie in it - - they deserve whatever they get !" philosophy. I think this is part of the problem with the world - and always has been. You say: "P.S. I don't see Sloper asking Catherine's forgiveness even on his death bed. It was not in his character. And maybe this should be filed under the unpopular opinions thread, but I feel like a chump forgiving somebody who does not truly ask for it. I feel like I'm giving up a chance for (legal) revenge someday. " I mean, aside from anything else, why was Dr. Sloper asking to see his daughter, if not to express some kind of love before he died? He was the kind of man who would have resolved all his financial and business concerns before he became too ill to do so. There's no reason for him to request to see Catherine, other than to make some kind of final peace with her. Now, obviously you're entitled to your opinion about it, which I don't doubt many agree with. To me, such an attitude doesn't do any good, not only to the offender, but to the one they offended. I believe if we were all more willing to hear another's point-of-view, even if it seems incomprehensible to us, and to try and be open to accepting the other's remorse and forgive them, we'd all be better off. But this thread is not only not the place to conduct an ongoing conversation about just one movie, it's also not the place to lecture.

This is an example of how two different people can have two profoundly different responses and interpretations of the same movie. That is my polite way of saying that I believe Calvinme has misunderstood the story and Catherine's character; I wonder how many times he's seen it? It's made abundantly clear in the final scenes of The Heiress that Catherine is extremely bitter. When Lavinia accuses her of cruelty, she replies, while calmly finishing her needlework, "Yes, I have been taught by masters." What a great line, and how well it signifies Catherine's transformation from an eager innocent young girl to the stone-cold woman she's become. Olivia de Havilland does wonderful work, showing this transformation. Her face looks different, hard, expressionless. And even more than her face,her voice changes. It becomes a cold flat voice, somehow deeper, certainly less girlish and happy, than the way she spoke before she was so profoundly hurt by the two most important people in her life. I could be wrong - it's all left to the viewer's own interpretation - but, like Tom here, I get the feeling that Catherine has turned her back on life and its joys, and is going to spend the rest of her life in that house, with no one and no thing to love. (By "no thing", I mean she does not appear to have a "passion" for anything, that there's nothing to indicate she's going to engage with any kind of activity outside the four walls of her home.) You are right, Calvin, when you say at least she "found her tongue". But it was only to use it to communicate her "dislike" of her father. There's nothing to indicate she's going to use her new maturity to pursue any kind of life beyond what she had with her father, after he dies.

Me too ! I'm with you, GayDivorcee, and Lawrence. I too just don't get the Beyonce thing. I don't know which annoys and puzzles me more, the "Beyonce is a goddess and a female role model to all women" thing, or the seemingly almost universal admiration of her music, which as far as I can hear is tuneless, unexciting, and unworthy of all the adoration it elicits. I cannot understand why. It reminds of the story about The Emperor's New Clothes. And you, Speedy, have called it, the great fraud, just like the smart kid in the crowd (from that story, I mean.)

I would say. That's why I wrote, earlier, that nice though it would have been had Catherine gone to see her father on his deathbed, the scene would not have been nearly as effective. It's a much more powerful scene - and movie - because she does not.

Right. And all the characters are so memorable and quirky. Look at Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre, for instance.

The Sunday Noir series opens March 5th with The Maltese Falcon. ( The "Maltese Falcon", the one with Humphrey Bogart, the Fat Man, and company...) I love this movie ( hey, I named myself after one of its characters), but I've seen it more times than I can count. Still, I'm thinking maybe they wanted to start with something both famous and extremely accessible.

Why would you include "Gangs of New York"? It wasn't a bad film ( although not one of Scorsese's best), but it wasn't set in Ireland, not one moment of it. Ok, maybe the Daniel Day-Lewis character is Irish, but that's about it. A film with Irish characters who live in America does not an Irish film make. "The Dead" is a great film, and very Irish, being based on the James Joyce story, and set and filmed in Dublin and its environs. It should have been way up there on that list.

Dargo, thanks for your thoughts on the relationship between Dr.Sloper and his daughter in The Heiress. Not to stray too far from what this thread is supposed to be about ( brief write-ups on films people have seen recently, their impressions, etc.), but I do want to respond to what you said here. Yes, there's no question that Dr.Sloper does come across as an unloving father, and he certainly does not provide her with any "emotional support" - at least, not the kind she needs. So it's no wonder Catherine is absolutely stricken when she hears what she believes her father really thinks of her. Notice I said "what she believes". This is because I think that Sloper's speech to her about what a disappointment she is to him is only half the story, it's only part of how he feels about her. Of course, that's the part that Catherine hears, and is naturally deeply wounded by it. But I believe that in his own distant, critical way, Dr. Sloper did love Catherine, and that he wishes to tell her so before he dies. And - here's where we may disagree - I think that Catherine should have gone to him. It was their last chance to speak to each other. And yes, you can say, ( presumably along with Catherine), that the doctor deserved Catherine's indifference, that "that's what you get" when you treat your own child as he treated her. I don't subscribe to that life philosophy myself; at the risk of sounding sappy and Hallmark-ish, I feel very strongly that when asked to forgive, we should forgive. That if someone - especially your own father - is dying, and has asked to see you ( I believe it was to ask for Catherine's forgiveness), that they should go to their parent and bestow that forgiveness. Then both the forgiver and the forgiven will experience a kind of grace, if they do so. I realize that sounds preachy, and possibly even religious ( and I am a committed agnostic, not religious at all), but I think that forgiveness is always better than coldness. Of course, the scene in the film is all the better and much more powerful, because Catherine refuses to go to him. I'm just saying, that it's also terribly sad. For her as much as for Dr. Sloper. Thinking about all this, I'm tempted to overcome my aversion to Henry James' difficult writing style, and have a go at Washington Square. It'd be interesting to see how this matter is dealt with in the book.

I just watched - - well,this morning, actually -- the last 45 minutes of The Heiress. SPOILERAMA ! I've seen this very good movie so many times, I can pick up on it like that - just over halfway through, but still, I knew what was going on. I tuned in just at the part where Catherine has discovered that her father "dislikes" her, and is determined to not stay another day in the house with him. She convinces Morris to elope with her that very night. Anyway, it was at that point that I began watching it, being completely familiar with all that had gone before. Every time I watch The Heiress I get something fresh out of it. This time, it was about the essence of the story's pathos. I think, the other times I've seen it, I'd concentrated on Morris, and his betrayal of Catherine. I was also aware ( how could you not be) of her father's attitude towards Catherine, but I'd mainly regarded her tragedy as being about Morris. This time it struck me that the saddest, most poignant aspect of this powerful story is the relationship between, not Catherine and Morris, but Catherine and her father. It's such a turning point for Catherine when Dr. Sloper reveals his disappointment in her as his daughter, how so unlike her mother she is, how plain and dull and meek she is. I believe that this revelation hurts Catherine more profoundly than Morris' rejection. And the scene in which Dr. Sloper realizes he's dying, and tries to talk to Catherine about it, is a study in bitterness between parent and child. The combination of Morris' departure and her father's speech to her renders Catherine into an ice-cold stone-hearted woman, literally overnight. When, a few days later, her father on his deathbed requests that she come and see him, she refuses. This scene, to me, is at the core of The Heiress. Catherine's heart has turned to stone, and she has not one iota of love or kindness or feeling for her father, and cannot summon any such feeling up even in his dying hour. This change in Catherine, her refusal to reconsider her relationship with her father in his last few minutes of life, struck me as profoundly sad.

But I love the wise -guy patter. It's one of the reasons why it's fun to watch film noir. Notice it's almost always given in "voice-over" / first-person narrative form. To me, it's as much a part of film noir as the shadowy old warehouses and docks, the flashing neon signs over the seedy hotel rooms, and the rain-swept streets. Let's not forget that what is regarded as cliche now was not so in the late 1940s-50s. And sometimes, it's those very cliches that I enjoy. Sometimes for fun I'll try and start up some kind of noir patter myself, usually trying it out on my hapless husband who politely agrees, "yes, you sound very hard-boiled." I might do this if there's a certain kind of music playing. Something like, "...It was one of those nights when you just can't sleep, and 3 more fingers of straight whisky isn't going to help. So I got up and hit the streets,hoping maybe to find something, I don't even know what. I needed a cigarette bad. As I lit one, I noticed someone following me, someone who backed into an alley everytime I turned around. Funny thing was, the someone kind of looked like a dame. Even my whisky -soaked brain knew something crooked was going on..." Ok, that's not that good. Maybe I need some sleazy saxophone music to help out. But you get what I mean - the noir voice-over dialogue is fun. Do people - did people, ever really talk like that? Baby, I don't care.

SPOILER Ok, ok, smarty-pants. There's always exceptions to everything. Nobody enjoys the idea of a nuclear bomb going off on a California beach. ( Or anywhere, for that matter.) But hey, you have to admit that that nosey chick kind of deserved what she got - - it's just too bad everyone else had to be vapourized along with her. ...or maybe not. Nah, I guess you can hardly accuse Kiss Me Deadly of having an ambiguous ending. And, yup, a depressing one.

Maybe it's me, but I don't find film noir movies depressing. In fact, I find most of them utterly entertaining, and sometimes even downright fun.

G.D. my friend ! I always enjoy your contributions here so much ! Believe it or not,I used to have a cassette tape of Les Paul and Mary Ford ("The Hits of..." or something like that.) Remember cassette tapes? My husband gave it to me, years ago, after a conversation we had about who invented the electric guitar. I remember I loved "How High the Moon". My favourite part is around when, just after Les Paul's little solo, Mary's voice kind of soars - I think it's around 1:11 on the video you posted. Fun song.

Looks like we're all going in different directions here this week. But hey, that's ok - this thread is nothing if not eclectic. I like Bobby Darin (speedy, have you seen the Kevin Spacey biopic about him?), and that Jay and the Americans tune was pretty darn good. But I've had tunes from Paul Simon's "Graceland" going through my head lately. Here's one of the catchiest from that classic record. It's so light and breezy and catchy. When the intro chanting part seques into that opening guitar bit, my ears zing with pleasure, that guitar bit is so pretty. I wish I had diamonds on the soles of my shoes.

Lawrence, I don't know what image of Richard Dysart you selected to post here, but when I click it, it comes up "Forbidden". I found another pic of him - hopefully this one will be "allowed". Richard Dysart ( I think) Hmm, not sure why this gentleman would be crush-worthy. However, we are all entitled to swoon over whomever we wish.

By the way, Richard Basehart's in another noir coming up in this program: Tension. I don't want to say too much about it, in case you haven't seen it. But it's really good. It's about a pharmacist, a bad marriage, and a secret identity. Plus, how can you go wrong with Audrey Totter? She's got such a fun line in this film: "Well, baby, we're all laughed out !" Actually, going slightly off-topic here: I love Audrey Totter. She's got such a tough, mean, yet sexy demeanour (sorry couldn't resist.) But here's the thing - I think she's funny ! She always makes me laugh. And I don't think it's unintentional on Audrey's part. Her face is not only pretty, it's very expressive, as is her voice. I think she uses these qualities to comic effect sometimes. Just look at her in the heroic but unsuccessful Lady in the Lake: she's hilarious ! Anyway, I recommend Tension; great fun, - oh, Cyd Charisse is in it too, sans dancing. And Basehart looks good in nerdy glasses.

Lorna, I add my voice to the others here who've recommended He Walked By Night. I mean, aside from anything else, ya gotta love that title. It is, however, as someone ( sorry to not give credit to them, I don't want to take the time to scroll back and check who it was) here said, more what is called a "police procedural" than a noir. Still, it has many noirish elements, including beautiful b & w cinematography (ok, hardly unique to this film) and deliciously dark and mysterious settings, including a finale that precedes the one in The Third Man. Yikes, hope that isn't a spoiler of sorts. Also, anything starring Richard Basehart is worth a look. I don't know why this actor isn't more well-known....he certainly deserves to be. (anyone seen the lovely and heartbreaking La Strada ?) Here's a wonderful shot from HWBN - just look at those venetian blind shadows ! And Basehart's face.

I think an ongoing series on TCM that features classic film noirs (films noir?) is a great idea.There seem to be a lot of noir fans who follow TCM, and there are lots of lesser-known but worthy noirs that could use a little attention drawn to them. And icing on the cake is Eddie M. to introduce them. But ! I hate to be one of those people who complain about TCM scheduling, and I'm also aware that many, maybe most, people don't watch the station live but record whatever they're interested in, so the actual time and day that a film is aired doesn't matter to them. "That said", I have to wonder why they picked Sunday mornings for this new noir series. If there's any time that seems particularly UN-noirish, it's Sunday morning. Why not pick a Friday or Saturday night slot? If TCM wants to air more popular, well-known movies in "prime time", fine; they could program the noir feature for late afternoon or late night ( like, 11 or 12), which strikes me as a much more appropriate time for noir, at least in terms of mood. Anyway, I guess that's just a quibble. I'm happy they're doing this at all, and will just have to resign myself to watching film noir Sunday mornings. I just hope those mornings won't be sunny.

It's interesting to compare great artists' versions of great songs. "All of Me" is one of those songs covered by many singers. Here are two of the best. Billie Holiday: Frank Sinatra: Which do you like better? I think they're both equally good, just different. edit: I just found out, posting this, that there's another song called "All of Me", by John Legend. Shows how out-of-it I am, I hadn't even heard of this one. But I listened to it carefully, and, sorry John Legend fans, it's not as good a song as the 1931 composition by the same name.

starkhome, thanks for your thoughtful comments about Odd Man Out. I do want to make one small correction, and I hope you won't be offended by it and think I'm slapping your wrists like some picayune school teacher who's missing the point some bright student has made. It's not actually Dublin, it's Belfast. I looked up the details about the filming of OMO, and saw that a lot of the location shooting was in Belfast. The film itself never states where exactly its events take place, it just says something about "some city in Northern Ireland". It's understandable you'd think it was Dublin, since that is probably the most famous city on the entire island of Ireland. However, most of the underground rebellion type strife had been settled in Dublin by 1947. Dublin is in The Republic of Ireland, which is an independent state ( and I think was even in 1947 .) Northern Ireland is a whole other story, which I won't go into because it would be a long and probably tedious read, plus I know very little about it. I do know, however, that the city of Belfast is in Northern Ireland, which is where most of the "troubles" concerning the Irish Republican Army occurred. Belfast even has a guided tour these days which takes you through many of the historic sites where the various "actions" (most of them very violent, on both sides of the struggle) occurred. Again, sorry, I blathered on here much more than I intended, and I am no expert on the history of the struggles of Ireland, both North and South. This is all probably pretty boring. But I thought it was worth pointing out that the setting for Odd Man Out would have been somewhere in Northern Ireland, as opposed to Eire, or the Republic of Ireland, because from about 1920 on,most of the "troubles" in Ireland were in the North. And Johnny McQueen headed a group of IRA - type rebels who would have been protesting in Northern Ireland - probably Belfast. Not that the film really concentrates on that aspect of the story - it could really have been about someone like Johnny anywhere there was a secret rebel group on the wrong side of the law. Hey, as I said, I know very little about all this. I even once thought that Ulster was a city in Northern Ireland, when in fact it's a region, sort of like a province.

Wait - why would you bother to add the "Sr." part? I was all mixed up, and thought you meant that Robert Walker, THE Robert Walker, was known as "Robert Walker Junior", and that his dad had been an actor, or something, but then I looked up Robert Walker JUNIOR and saw that it was Robert Walker's son, which I guess means that THE Robert Walker could be referred to as Robert Walker SENIOR, but honestly, who thinks of him as Robert Walker SENIOR, don't we just think of him as Robert Walker, and his son is an afterthought besides I don't think Robert Walker JUNIOR ever did anything as interesting as get killed onscreen of course on a merrygoround this has turned into a stream of consciousness blather how do you like it But anyway, although I like them both (Van Heflin and THE Robert Walker), I fail to see much of a resemblance sorry.

Ok, first, full disclosure: I don't follow every single thing that goes on on these boards, or on the rest of the TCM website. So I may very well have missed some kind of announcement about "The Essentials" being discontinued, or re-programmed, or postponed til some undeclared future date, or something. But - what happened to "The Essentials", the specific programming that used to occur every Saturday night on TCM? You know, the time slot from 8 to 12 ( roughly) where Robert Osborne would talk about what he (or the guest, or the programmers, not really sure how it worked) regarded as "essential" viewing for hard core classic movie fans. There was always a guest host - not a guest for one night, but for an entire year's worth of Saturday night "essential" viewing. It was part of TCM's programming for years and years. Is it still on? It didn't seem to be last Saturday night. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed that evening's line-up, and enjoy the thread about it here. However, it didn't seem to be in any way part of an "Essentials" program. I wasn't in love with "The Essentials", but I didn't mind it either. Most of the time I'd already seen the films they were showcasing, several times, so would often skip it. But I also understood the thinking behind "The Essentials", and never really minded their airings of ( to hard core and maybe older fans) really well-known movies. Am I blathering on about nothing here? Is "The Essentials" still an ongoing program at TCM, and I'm just missing something? Or have they ( perhaps only temporarily?) cancelled it, maybe due to Mr. Osborne's health issues? Is it in some kind of programming limbo? Just curious....probably everybody else here knows what's going on with "The Essentials" except me. Can someone bring me up to date?