Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by slaytonf

  1. You can see here the desperate desire for people to see things follow in cultural conventions.  The supreme demand for a sentimental ending p e r verts  Shaw's play even till today.  As a social reformer, Shaw wanted Eliza to achieve her emancipation from both the economic servitude of her class and the oppression of the overbearing ruling class symbolized by Higgins.  It is in a way a sanction of the Stockholm effect, where a hostage comes to form an emotional bond with their captor.

    • Like 1
  2. This was not the ending Shaw intended.  In fact, during his life, Shaw never saw his ending performed.  He wrote the play to end indeed with Eliza going to marry Freddie.  But the actor playing Higgins played it to imply she would return to him.  The ending we see in My Fair Lady was created by the original movie version of the play (Pygmalion, 1938).  Shaw hated it.  The intention of the play is to overturn cultural convention, but the force of cultural convention it seems was too overwhelming.  A more recent adaptation (1983) with Margot Kidder and Peter O'Toole has what is likely a more faithful ending.

    • Like 5
    • Thanks 1
  3. 20 hours ago, Dargo said:

    Btw, there's another Italian movie that I'm almost sure DID prominately feature one of the older 124's and which is also a road picture of sorts as I recall, and which I've watched on TCM in the past. It could have even been a French film, now that I think about it.

    I'm not thinking of Amanti (aka, A Place for Lovers) that turkey starring Dunaway and Mastroianni, but another film.

    (...any ideas here?)

    Well, if yer almost sure, that's good, 'cause IMCDB, despite a lengthy list of 124 Spiders and Sports doesn't have anything I'm familiar with except The Lady in the Car With Glasses and a Gun (1970).  But the main transport in that is a 1969 Mercury Marquis.  The Spider only has a cameo.  And it's never been shown on TCM

    And thinking of road movies set in ol' Europe, I can only think of like Two For the Road (1969, but the car in that is a 1963 Alfa Romeo Giulia 1600 Sprint), or Alice in the Cities (1974, but that is a 1973 Renault 4 Export), or Three (1969, but that is a Peugeot 202 BH Cabriolet.)

    So, go fish.

    • Thanks 1
  4. I do know the movie.  It is Il Sorpasso (1962), with Vittorio Gassman, Jean Louis Trintignant, and Catherine Spaak (aaahhh).  Directed by Dino Risi.  It's been shown on TCM Imports.  The car in the movie is a 1956 Lancia Aurilea Convertible, and a nice car:


    Comments on IMCDB note that two Lancias were used, based on differing rear lights (sheesh).

    • Thanks 1
  5. It's true moviemaking is a team effort.  That's why I look for similarities in movies by the same director with different crews.  That helps to recognize what the director is doing.  I don't watch different movies by the same cinematographer or editor with the same end in mind, but now that you mention it, I may start.  My guess is it would be harder to see their styles because, though a collaboration, making a movie is still controlled--guided--by a director.

    • Like 1
  6. 9 hours ago, TopBilled said:

    So while TCM is saying they air films uncut, that is not always true.

    What they mean, and what they could probably say more clearly, is that they don't edit movies. 

    I notice lots of places in old studio movies where evidence of a censor's scissors is apparent.  Especially in movies of pre-1934 date.  I recall it being mentioned on a number of occasions by Mr. Osborne and others that states and cities enforced their own standards, clipping movies shown there and sending them back to the studios edited.

    • Like 1
  7. *Sigh*  Guess I couldn't get you to do the work of listing some movies.  Well, from what I can see, they are mostly documentaries.  The one fiction movie likely to have a real GT would be, what else?, Le Mans (1971):


    And, less likely, Un Homme et Une Femme (1966):


    • Like 1
  8. What makes a great movie?  What makes great art?  Why are Rembrandt and Marc Chagall great artists?  I find knowing about art, its history and schools helps in understanding what a director is doing in a movie.  That and a lot of film courses I took.  Community colleges and continuing education programs offer courses if you are interested.  You can probably also find something on the internet.

    A book called The Cinema As Art, by Ralph Stephenson and J. R. Debrix is a great overview of filmmaking, from sound and lighting to cinematography and editing.  It was published in 1965, but is available used.  It doesn't cover many decades of movies, but the basics it covers are still the basics today.

    Here are some examples of what I think are how directors show their brilliance.  Clarence Brown to me is the equal of any director.  One of the things I like about his movies is how he uses light and shadow to create atmosphere.  It might be said it was the cinematographer that did it, but I see the same things in his movies with different cinematographers, so that tells me it is Clarence Brown that is responsible for it.  Here's a shot from The Yearling (1946):


    The standard way would be to light the scene from sources all around the set.  Brown uses light from the candle and fire as natural sources to create a warm affect for the home.  See also how he uses a downward spot to show the candle's light, eliminating the usual shadow of the candle stick by a side light.

    In The Thing From Another World (1951), Howard Hawks dazzles us with minimalism.  He has people wander around a frozen waste and all without warning forming a ring:

    By having us come to the same realization that it's a flying saucer under the ice at the same time as the characters, he pulls us into the story.  Identifying more with the the players heightens the power of the events in the movie.  All with just a few dark points moving across a featureless plane.  It always thrills me to see this.

    One last example and I'll have done.  It's also from Hawks, from Only Angels Have Wings (1939).  He was the master of what I call ensemble scenes.  You see them from time to time in his movies where he assembles a group of people in a space.  This is his best.  It starts out simple with a small group around a piano:


    Static.  Not much energy.  Sparsely populated.  Other groups focused elsewhere.  But as the scene goes on, more people join, the energy grows until at the end the screen is packed, tiers of people into the background, vibrant, celebrating.

    This is what I look to see in movies.  I hope this gives you an idea of how to decide how good a job the director has done.

    • Like 3
  9. 8 minutes ago, Dargo said:

    it's always much easier and feels more confident in a controlled four-wheel drift than any front or rear engined car. 

    Yeah.  I hate not feeling confident in a four-wheel drift. . . .

    Y i i i i i i !

    • Haha 1
  10. 23 hours ago, Dargo said:

    Greer here looks pretty nice here in green too, I'd say....

    Apropos. . . .


    Unfortunately, there's no good picture I could find of this gown.  One of the most stunning on one of the most beautiful women in movies.  People familiar with the movie Random Harvest (1942) will know.

    • Like 3
  11. 2 hours ago, Sepiatone said:


    Naturally,  Montague Summers was English. 

    Looks like 'fun' also isn't  in the American vocabulary. 

    2 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

    The "u" hasn't been excized  from every dictionary source I've searched in. 

    As I said, Mr. Webster wasn't completely successful ridding Americn of all those pesky Norman u's.

    • Haha 1
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
  • Create New...