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

ArchieLeech

Members
  • Content Count

    40
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

About ArchieLeech

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. My year was 1982. Some pretty memorable movies... [blade Runner|http://www.deepfocusreview.com/reviews/bladerunner.asp] E.T. The Extra Terrestrial [Fanny & Alexander|http://www.deepfocusreview.com/reviews/fannyandalexander.asp] [Fitzcarraldo|http://www.deepfocusreview.com/reviews/fitzcarraldo.asp] [The Thing|http://www.deepfocusreview.com/reviews/thing.asp] Fuller's White Dog
  2. I've never much cared for the original. I love John Wayne, but his performance seems too cartoonish here. And Hathaway's direction just seems very "1960s", in the worst way possible. [This review|http://deepfocusreview.com/reviews/truegrit.asp] pretty much sums up my feelings on the matter... Edited by: ArchieLeech on Jan 8, 2011 2:35 PM
  3. [Mongol|http://deepfocusreview.com/reviews/mongol.asp] was wonderful. I completely agree with what you said. I've read that there were supposed to be two sequels, but now the director is having second thoughts. Maybe another filmmaker will pick up the films... None of the elements of this film are original; we've seen it all before. But it's done so well that suddenly those big Hollywood epics are relevant again. The scenery was oddly beautiful, considering most of the film takes place in fields. And the characters were given surprising depth, enough so that, if they decide to make the ne
  4. I envy you. Unfortunately, I've never caught the film in an authentic Cinerama presentation. Perhaps if I had, I would feel differently. I do enjoy the film from a narrative point of view (although that last venture into modern L.A. sort of takes me out of it), which is why I feel pretty let-down by the odd formal presentation on DVD. I see your point though...
  5. [Here's a review |http://deepfocusreview.com/reviews/howthewestwaswon.asp] of the film and the DVD on [Deep Focus Review|www.deepfocusreview.com], and it's a pretty good argument why this movie is one of the most unfortunate films of all time. Cinerama was sort of silly, and it's left the movie in shambles from a home video standpoint. Unless you're in a theater with Cinerama-ready projection, you'll never see the movie as it's intended, leaving Warner's impressive attempts to restore the picture in vain. I feel regretful whenever I see this picture... Message was edited by: ArchieLeech
  6. Burgess Meredith was in The Diary of a Chambermaid with Judith Anderson
  7. Jos? Ferrer was in Whirlpool with Charles Bickford
  8. Dekker was in Mann's The Furies Next, Wendell Corey
  9. My definition of the auteur theory is perhaps not as specific or picky as Andr? Bazin, no. I prefer the more generalized term, as discussed in Jeanine Basinger's book Anthony Mann, which suggests that pattern narratives in a director's career are also signifiers of auteurism. And so, comparing Mann's Westerns, he just as much an auteur as Ford or Welles or any other filmmaker... It's enough for me that when you watch a director's movies and can say, yes, that's definitely a Curtiz move (or whomever), then there you have an auteur. Anyway, back to Man of the West... I really love
  10. MissGoddess, glad you enjoyed the article. If you're a big Western fan, I'm working on an article for The Searchers now, which should be done in late July, early August. I understand your reasoning for posting that quote from my article; the overall point there is that Mann's auteurist signature is always evident, just not as formally outright as other filmmakers. His disappearing is the illusion of his artistry, and along with his ability to involve us on an emotional level so expertly, it is his auteurist's stamp. I do look for the "auteur touch" as you put it, and Mann's is pretty
© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...