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

Sgt_Markoff

Members
  • Posts

    2,676
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Sgt_Markoff

  1. :wacko: Nope ...I myself don't find it 'dated' at all. I almost never even concur anytime someone says 'oh, that movie is so dated'. It's a terrible line of criticism. The whole concept, this whole premise jars with me. 'Dated' is almost always misapplied or taken to absurd extremes.

    The bottom line (to my way of thinking) is that if a movie seems 'dated'--that's not the fault of the movie, it's your fault (that is to say, the viewer's fault). Modern audiences are inadvertently prone (let's say) to be "overly-mindful" of too many unrelated historical trends at once. One possible reason, anyway.

    I say, treat any production on its own terms, rather than disparage it with criteria which were not even present during its own execution. This urge towards hindsight is a bum steer...

    Anyway I always enjoyed 'Lifeboat'  whenever I happened to encounter it on late-night TV. I like the performances; special FX are fine; my interest doesn't flag; I find the entire narrative ingeniously accomplished. Pacing. photography, and editing all fine.

    No 'political' qualms arise for me either; no 'class' issues; I have no quibble with the treatment of women, the harming of marine life, or attitudes towards any ethnic minorities in the flick. I wouldn't alter the storyline in the slightest. Who are we to even contemplate tampering with it?

    The standout among the cast (in my personal opinion) is Walter Slezak. His is the pivotal role, the most nuanced.

  2. That's all very well; and I do appreciate being treated to a fine summary like that. Thanks very much for posting it; as I was not around when this "online class" transpired.

    However...? I note that the list above, oddly still deals primarily with 'story elements' (vague term sorry, I dislike even using it). Still, why is this?

    • Question: Is there a list of similar list of studio production characteristics?
    • Question: does 'instrument of fate' encompass 'fateful coincidence'? (Such as the scarf in "Killer's Kiss"?)
    • Question: why is ' doomed male lead' missing? Example: 'Night and the City', which I am always ready to consider the most exemplary noir possible, even over 'Detour')

    Next comment: Several of these list items seem to tally with Will Wright's classic study of American Western paradigms ('Sixguns and Society').

    For example, 'expertise triumphs' is one type of western (typified by Lancaster/Marvin in 'The Professionals' or Borgnine/Holden in 'The Wild Bunch'). Another western theme is 'man against community' (where the society itself is corrupt and the stranger-in-town is on the side of the angels).

    I wonder if a close juxtaposition with Wright could be done? Does anyone want to try? There's only five. It's not been attempted successfully for any other genre, as far as I know. Probably because tallying up Wright's five-basic-western-modes doesn't come as easily to any other genre (as the one he chose to dissect).

    On the other hoof, maybe noir only has one central narrative motif: 'the doomed man'. [All the more odd that it is not listed above, in the previous post].

    And before anyone pounces on me, I regret to say I have not yet read Cawelti as I have enjoyed Wright; just haven't gotten around to Cawelti yet. [Cawelti analyzes all American movie genres, not just westerns, although he has not devised a 'model' as Wright has done.]

    The detective genre is well covered by several critics; (but I don't personally see a reason to explore detective narrative structure. The only interesting motive would be to see if it can also align with Wright's model. I doubt it will, though).

    As for sci-fi or horror, who cares? ha

    cheers,

    Markoff

    p.s. "The Maltese Falcon" is not a noir!

  3. Hum! I thought the premise of this thread was: classic cars in classic movies!

    Anyway on that Jensen: perhaps I flubbed on my word choice there. I mean to indicate this car is 'not famous' when its merits should be more widely appreciated.

    Title of movie: I'm thinking it was either a Joe Don Baker flick like 'Mitchell' or 'Framed' (luv that actor!) ...or, Alistair McLean's 'Fear is the Key' (1972) starring Barry Newman (of 'Vanishing Point' fame). Will confirm shortly.

    How about this one next:

    5551c2ea2bc75e7c1f523002c66afc53.jpg

    Notably used in the opening sequence of two wonderful flicks: 'The Day of the Jackal' (..riddled by machine-pistols) and memorably wrecked by Burt Reynolds in the (original) 'Longest Yard'!

    • Like 1
  4. It's like this: I used to enjoy an occasional bottle of saki whenever I dined at a sushi restaurant. Sometimes it was good and sometimes it was bad. Saki is an acquired taste. It can be pungent even under the best circumstances but usually it has a good buzz with it.

    But then I happened to be chatting about it with someone and they mentioned how they didn't like it at all and they gave me a really concrete reason why they didn't like it. Something like, "it tastes like old sweat socks".

    And you know what? They were exactly right.

    So now whenever I eat sushi, I never order sake because that is really what saki often tastes like. The observation stuck in my head.

    As I describe above, I've seen Burr in a bunch of his most famous flicks. I'm not missing out. But now when I look at him...well..yuck. I don't want even want to look at his face, its totally creepy to me now and I have no real interest in any scene he plays in.

    I might find myself watching a flick with him in it; but I won't go out of my way to do so. If you still can't grasp it after the explanation above, then I suppose either I'm not explaining it well or its a prejudiced audience. Eh. Let it go..

  5. How about the infamous Jensen Interceptor? Like a bat out of hell.

    I can name one cinematic pursuit sequence featuring this baby; but I'll have to think about it for a while before coming up with the title (no I won't cheat by using IMcDB).

     

    Jensen%20Interceptor%20III%201973%20fron56865616-770-0@2X.jpg?rev=1

    ebay433181.jpg

  6. Well I don't know what-all about that (what the OP is talking about) but I have seen this film and read the thriller by Walter Wager. Wager is the guy who (although this is hotly contested) devised the idea for 'Die Hard'.

    The book is indeed, a nail-biter. Three convicts from a military prison escape and take over a missile silo; and issue demands.

    But the movie is flat and turgid. One of the worst adaptations I've ever seen. Real shame.

  7. It was hard for me to believe that Guinness could outdo or top his own performance in 'Kwai' (which is my favorite film of all time, btw) but yes I agree with the general consensus out there. This strange role is probably his career-best. However, its still not my favorite movie from him.

    By the way, he doesn't play the 'mentally unbalanced' officer as described by the OP. That role went to John Mills.

  8. I love that grisly scene in 'Run Silent, Run Deep' where the skinny blond crewman is dumped from his bunk to land flat on his back in the narrow aisle below. And then --he looks up in the next moment--to see one of the torpedoes above him rolling out of its rack to plummet right down on top of him. Ouch! Splat! That must have smarted! (Thankfully, such things can't happen these days...)

  9. Back to vehicles: I'm a big fan of muscle cars (although admittedly not very knowledgeable) so I can only add this to recommend me--I despise the look of almost all modern wedge-body cars we see on the road today. They turn mah stummik!

    I've been lucky enough to reside in 2- 3 towns on the East Coast where classic cars are spotted regularly (Pottstown PA for example).

    Anyway: Mustangs and Barracudas, Sebrings and Chargers, Javelins, Camaros and Roadrunners, Goats and Dusters, Challengers--I luv's em.

    Here's a fave I'm sure you recognize:

    hqdefault.jpg&f=1

     

  10. "Flying Down to Rio" is astounding. Although I don't generally regard musicals very highly I both admire and enjoy most of the Astaire romps. And Kelly too. For not being any especial fan of the genre I've actually seen quite a few and been greatly entertained.

    I suppose its like comedy--when a musical is bad, its really bad; just like when a comedy is unfunny its more painful than any other kind of pain.

  11. Question: is it true that ABC initiated the television programming year's "second season" (aka, 'summer programming') only in 1966 after the success of 'Get Smart' had them scrambling for ratings? Did the big three networks only air re-runs in summer prior to that? Heard this recently and it seems staggering to reflect on.

  12. I'm only exposed to TCM on Friday or Saturday nights when I'm enjoying a juicy burger, spuds, and blowing the foam off a succession of medicinal apertifs, digestive tonics, and post-prandials.

    So, if there's any toothsome horror movies coming up (such as 'Burnt Offerings' or something like that) I'll miss out unless its weekend fare.

    • Thanks 1
  13. Quote

    If we were to start refusing to watch or otherwise consume art or entertainment

    I'm not advocating such a deliberate or widespread practice; certainly not for myself nor anyone else. No need to prop up straw-men here. :huh:

    As discussed above in this thread, nuttin' wrong with "drawing a line" wherever it personally suits one ...as long as one doesn't force others to toe it as well.

    And really: seeing as how I've already consumed yrs and yrs of movies and television; it's not hurting me in the slightest to obey my revulsion at Burr's private life; (especially if it ever involved violence) or to avoid contemporary garbage like 'Human Centipede'.

    Consider it this way: if I dislike broccoli, why should I eat broccoli? For the sake of being open-minded and egalitarian in my diet? We all have such filters, somewhere. No one consumes everything. 'Discrimination' is healthy: it indicates discernment. ^_^

     

    Quote

    which involves anyone guilty of any kind of wrong-doing ( and nowadays the bar for that is pretty low),

    In this case, (a classic-era actor from the 'greatest generation', a man who was otherwise impeccable, talented, and above-board; not a death-row convict after all) there's every reason to embrace his works; and I've done that with other stars concealing warts far worse than his. Many's the time.

    So I'm not applying a "wholesale ban" on anyone; I've already viewed Burr in most of his famous roles. I'm just saying I would not now be seeking out his more obscure stuff or going out of my way to further appreciate his talent which the OP hinted (via her own enthusiasm) might be worthwhile.

    Is all this stated plainly enough, or shall I clarify further?

    Quote

    there'd be very little left to watch, read, view, or listen to.

    H'mmm. In the case of some newly-coined star or celeb working today (when the bar is at its lowest) they've earned no credit with me to begin with, (there's already very much *going against them* actually) and I already shun/snub them. Thus, no dilemma. I'm not in the slightest discomfited. :rolleyes:

    Appreciate the input ...pleasant way to pass some time...I hope the mild clash of these contradictory viewpoints doesn't ruffle anyone's feathers...

    • Confused 1
© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...