lzcutter
-
Posts
12,344 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
9
Posts posted by lzcutter
-
-
Hollis,
One of the best films on Vietnam is a little seen but widely acclaimed film starring Burt Lancaster called Go Tell the Spartans.
-
Hollis,
From the 1920s until the late 1940s, each studio owned theaters. There would be a Fox Theater, a Warner'sTheater, a Paramount Theater in cities around the country. In Los Angeles there was a Warner's Theater downtown and one in Hollywood. By owning the theaters and supplying films to the theaters the studios were often able to off-set the cost of productions. The studios would often block book a theater or pre-sell a film.
By pre-selling the film, the studios had a practice of collecting up-front money from other theater owners for films not yet in production. Pretty clever, heh?
Other theater owners did not like the fact that often the best movies were booked into studio owned theaters and not offered to the other owners until the films had run their course. They would become available in second runs but by then the majority of people had seen them and box office receipts were not as profitable.
In 1948, the Supreme Court passed down the ruling that the studios had to get out of the exhibition/theater business because it represented restraint of trade.
Some studios such as Paramount, split their business in two.
But, because the studios no longer had the profits coming in from their own theaters, there was less money for new films to be produced.
Many consider this to be one of the main reasons that the studio system began to decline.
I'm sure Cinesage, Kyle, JackBurley and others can add information about this.
-
Leone's films almost take place in a universe of their own, so in any event anything that Eastwood could have thought of would have had to fit into Leone's vision, wouldn't you say?>>
Of course. I'm not trying to argue with you. I'm just trying to say that Eastwood might have had some suggestions for his character.
I'm not saying he suggested camera angles or story or directing style to Leone.
Just that, like all actors, known and unknown, he might have had some suggestions for his character.
Film making is a collaborative effort and a good director is open to ideas from his cast and crew. He can decide to use them or not, that's his prerogative as director.
-
I didn't think we were arguing semantics.
I'm not trying to suggest that Eastwood created his Man With No Name persona. I'm just trying to suggest that, like most actors, he may have had some ideas about the characters motivation, back story and mannerisms.
If he had, he likely would have talked with Leone about it. Leone might have agreed or not.
All actors I have known over the years have ideas about their characters. Some are valid suggestions and some aren't.
It is up to the director to decide whether or not the actor is on the money or not.
That's all.
-
Yes and Yes.
Have been watching the yearly ceremony since the mid-1960s and have never missed a year.
Don't know if that makes me a dedicated film buff or crazy or both.
-
There's a lot of useful information and analysis that can be learned from film critics and film historians.>>
Yes, but for the most part, they are two different breeds of cats. Roger Ebert and Leonard Maltin excepting, most film critics are known for being film critics and not film historians. Some of the best film historians in this country are largely unknown to the majority of the population. However, their books are available and make for fascinating reading.
Not everyone puts as much faith in film critics as you. When I was younger I used to read certain film critics religiously. However, over the years, film criticism has changed from the thoughtful and well written Gene Siskel types.
Now days you read a film critic at your own peril because they will probably give away major plot points or the ending without warning.
Many people form their own opinions about movies based on their experience with the film and not what film critics have to say about it.
Why? Because some critics (not all) talk about film in some abstract way that has little bearing to those of us reading the review. Also, some film critics seem to think that they are above the people they are writing for and that condescending tone comes through loud and clear.
Not all critics are like that, but not every local film reviewer is a Gene Siskel, Roger Ebert or Molly Haskell.
Yes, I could read their reviews on line I suppose but I don't have that much time in my daily life to want to do that. I enjoy reading Ebert's books but I don't hang on his every word nor do I seek out his reviews on line.
-
Regarding the Garbo DVD set box, maybe we were not expecting high definition quality but some of the copies were so, so, it could have been done better.>>
Nakis,
Unfortunately, sometimes despite the best efforts of all involved, the picture quality of some films is not going to be as good as other films. Why?
Because it will come down to what were the elements that were used to make the digital master? Restoration workers will always try to use original elements or fine-grains when possible.
However, due to deterioration, time, fires and the fact that until the Home Video market came along in the late 1970s, the studios did not know there would be a market for their classic films or for the extras.
While I wish that every film restored to digital masters would look as good as the day it was first projected, the sad reality is that not every film is going to look that way.
I wish the studios and those in charge had listened more to Scorcese, Roger Mayer and others back in the mid-1970s when they began raising the issue of our film heritage deteriorating. It might have made a difference for some films.
-
Now perhaps it takes longer because those same video masters would no longer seem acceptable, people are getting used to sharper images and restored masters, and many also expect some extras>>
It's not so much that the video masters are unacceptable these days as it is that the technology has changed so much since those video masters were made. A good number of those video masters are on analog video masters and today they need to be digital video masters.
If done right, should make the new digital masters even better looking than the older analog masters.
But, as Cinemascope wrote, it will take time to remaster all these films to digital tape. It is an expensive undertaking and if restoration is involved, it can be very labor intensive as well.
-
Mr Dash,
In the upper right hand corner of every post that you create are two icons. The one to the left is an edit button. You can click on that icon and it will bring your reply up in the message box and allow you to correct any mistakes.
When finished, just click save at the bottom of the page and your edited post will reappear as part of the thread.
-
Is there any chance that The Plow That Broke the Plains will be playing anytime soon?
I just finished reading Tim Egan's book "The Worst Hard Time: The Story of Those Who Survived the Great American Dust Bowl".
One of the stories in the book is of Bam White and his family. Bam White is the man at the plow in the film. He wasn't paid very much for being in the film but it helped his family survive the Dust Bowl. He was ridiculed by his neighbors for being in the film. He was not really a farmer but a cowboy. But he took the job because he needed the money.
He died within a year of making the film probably from dust pneumonia.
Would love to see the film.
-
This is not impossible, but not any more likely than any other unknown actor giving "tips" to any director..>>
I don't know that having suggestions about a character that an actor is portraying is giving tips to the director.
Most actors have ideas about a character's backstory and how they might react in a scene.
Often they will confer with the director and sometimes, the director will agree and film it that way as well as his way.
Collaborating with the director in that regard is what I was referring to.
-
One of the most beautiful but can't recall the last time it was used is the Los Angeles Theater. >>
Filmlover,
The LA Conservancy each summer co-hosts "Last Remaining Seats" . They show classic films in a series of movie palaces around town. Last summer they were able to screen either "Star is Born" with Garland or "Rebel" at the Los Angeles Theater.
The interior of that movie palace has to be seen to be believed. I had the good fortune many years ago to go inside. It's where I learned to always check out the bathrooms of art deco places. The womens bathroom downstairs at the Los Angeles is huge and so ornate!
They even had a periscope so that women could go down there and smoke and not miss the movie. They piped the sound of the movie into the bathrooms so moviegoers could keep up with the action.
You'd probably love Last Remaining Seats. Besides the Los Angeles, they are able to hold screenings in The Tower, the Orpheum and others.
-
Filmlover,
It's the one theater Mr Cutter and I always go to. I love the customer service, the lack of ads, the ushers staying to make sure the film is projected properly. I love the fact that they came to their senses and kept the Cinerama Dome.
I used to enjoy going to the Chinese but traffic around there has gotten so bad that I haven't been there since it all became Hollywood and Highland.
I forgot to add that I also like their Filmmaker Series and their AFI series where once a week (I think it's Tuesday evenings) they screen an older film in one of the theaters.
Message was edited by:
lzcutter
-
Filmlover,
I think that's because of the restoration. I used to love going to the Egyptian in the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s because the auditorium (with a balconey) was so large.
But when the American Cinemateque took over, they carved the original theater up and added the small performance space in the back where Charles Phoenix does his Holiday and Summer Slide shows.
When they added the speakers along the side that also carved up the auditorium. It was a great old theater though it was very run down even thirty years ago. I salute the Cinemateque for restoring it and keeping it open.
I just wish they had done a better job on the auditorium.
-
But as filmlover confirmed, some of us happen to like at least some of the movies he made... it's a bit of an overgeneralization to say all of a director's movies are bad just because of your own personal taste when there are a lot of people who did like some of his movies.>>
If this was a thesis class in film I would agree with you but its a message board where people frequently post their thoughts and feelings about films and filmmakers.
You are free to disagree with me. That's fine. I didn't say all his films were bad. I don't think he is a very good film director.
I don't think I am insulting anyone dead or living by voicing that opinion. You are free to like his films all you want.
I love John Ford films but not everyone does. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't tell me what it is about his films they don't like. One of the best things about this message board is the sharing of information about films and filmmakers. Sometimes you can persuade people to watch a film they wouldn't ordinarily watch. Sometimes you can get them to look at a film in a different way. And sometimes, you just have to agree to disagree.
And yes, it still strikes me as odd why someone would want to cast such a negative light on directors (or actors) who are no longer with us, when they were part of the Golden Age of Hollywood...>>
Because not every film was great and not every filmmaker was great. As I have said, I admire the fact that you find something good in every film you watch. That's admirable.
But this is a message board where people will talk about the films they like and don't like. I don't hold with the idea that just because they were part of the Golden Age of Hollywood that makes them all great. The reality is they were human, just like all of us, and they made some good films, some great films and they made some duds.
Talking about why they made some duds often can tell us why the film was bad or not successful. And that is just as important as talking about the good and great films.
we are all free to watch what we like and not watch what we don't like.>>
Yes, we are. I will watch all of Paint Your Wagon for the few parts that I like of the film and I will watch all of Mr Roberts and love every minute of it. Just because I don't think he was very good director doesn't mean I don't watch his movies.
-
I agree with you filmlover, Josh Logan did direct some good movies, I still can't understand why someone would simply want to tarnish the entire career of a director just on account of one movie they didn't like... I mean, say all the awful things about anybody if they actually did something intentionally to hurt others. But to speak in such broad stokes about someone simply on account of not liking one picture seems a bit overblown.>>
I wasn't trying to be overblown, I have seen all of Logan's films and the only one I like from beginning to end is Mr Roberts.
I don't think he was a very good film director. He was a much better stage director by all accounts.
I also don't think that saying he is not a very good film director is awful or blasphemous. It's only my opinion based on watching all his films.
I would hope that Logan was decent fellow who treated his casts and crews with respect. But I don't know that for a fact so it would be wrong of me to say otherwise.
-
Mr Dash,
I would hope that instead of deleting your posts, you would hang around the boards.
Deleting your posts will throw the board into chaos because each thread that you have posted to will go to the top of the list and it will look like you have responded to a new post in those threads.
We had a poster here last summer who went through and deleted almost 500 of his posts. It took days and caused a great deal of chaos and grumpiness.
I know that you have not been made to feel very welcome here and you have been called names.
We aren't always as polite as we should be here but I hope that you will give us a second chance.
-
Anne,
The city going west stretches now almost out to Calico Basin and will likely stretch to Red Rock Canyon before its done.
On the eastern side, at night the lights of Green Valley and Henderson can be seen from Sloan (the little place just before you round the bend into Las Vegas on the 15). They are closing Nevada Landing in April to make way for multi-use housing and retail. Someday, I suspect, the city will go all the way to Stateline (Primm).
Ben,
I agree about Viva Las Vegas! It is a wonderful film filled with places that aren't there anymore.
-
We are discussing the merits of Joshua Logan, director. It's a message board. Not everyone is going to agree on their opinions of his directing career. You think he directed some good films. Some of us disagree with you.
We are not lambasting him, we are telling you we don't find him a good director. No one has attacked his character.
There is always going to be agreement and disagreement around here because that's the nature of this site. We're not always going to only say nice things about all film and film makers.
I love film. I have spent my life loving film. I have spent over half my life working in film. But I don't love every film or director or actor ever made.
I know from previous posts that you look for the good in every film. And that is admirable. But this is a message board and while you love film very much you cannot dictate to people what they can talk about or how they should talk about a subject.
-
No, I was just giving you my reason for not including One From the Heart.
Artistic renditions or natural looking, all responses are welcome.
-
One From the Heart was mainly created on a soundstage so while I consider the art direction and production design of the constructed set to be top notch, it's still not real to me the way the others are for being filmed on location.
Roger Rabbit is a great addition of post-war Los Angeles.
-
With a hat on, he looks just like the guy. >>
And all these years, I thought it was you.
-
Las Vegas. The city whose skyline looks none other. Where most cities skyline revolve around civic and government buildings, the skyline of Las Vegas revolves around neon and gambling. Or at least it did.
Today, it is a different story.
But back in the day, the skyline of the Strip (different from Downtown) was best captured by the original Ocean's 11. Want to know what the Strip was like during the Rat Pack era, this is the film.
With the opening of Caesars Palace in 1966, the Strip would begin to move towards a more modern feeling. But Ocean's 11 captures that post-war era that put Las Vegas on the map.
Diamonds are Forever captures Las Vegas in its last hurrah of the early 1970s before the decline and before the re-invention that Steve Wynn began with the building of the Mirage.
Best film to capture Downtown and the early days of the Strip: The Las Vegas Story and Meet Me in Las Vegas.
Anyway you slice it, the skyline of Vegas is unique and the Vegas skyline of old tells a great deal about the town.
-
Los Angeles is a hard city to depict on Film because we seem to have no central center. We are, at times, like Dorothy Parker says 32 suburbs in search of a city.
That said Los Angeles on Film:
1950s Perhaps best captured in color: A Star is Born starring Judy Garland Filled with so many places that aren't there anymore.
Modern day 1970s: Shampoo
Our past: Chinatown Glimpses of our past that have since been destroyed.
Modern today: Michael Mann's Collateral
For the record, we don't all live in Lautners or Neutras or Eichlers but Lord knows, we wish we did.
Clint Eastwood's westerns
in Westerns
Posted
Cinemascope,
When the Autrey Center for the American West did an exhibit on Leone last year, Clint Eastwood was one of the actors most prominently featured in the video interviews that accompanied the exhibit.