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

Recommended Posts

I just figured out how to post ‘em!!  Man, look out, all these Dylan songs and Leonard Cohen and .  . . there’s no end to YouTubes.  What do I say, Beware this an off topic and music link post?  It was that offensive?  It was a legit post because of the movie being discussed - Night Moves - speaking for myself of course.  Do I get another black mark by the moderator?  Who is Us? 37 Kittens might enjoy a little rock-n-roll song now and then.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Thompson said:

I just figured out how to post ‘em!!  Man, look out, all these Dylan songs and Leonard Cohen and .  . . there’s no end to YouTubes.  What do I say, Beware this an off topic and music link post?  It was that offensive?  It was a legit post because of the movie being discussed - Night Moves - speaking for myself of course.  Do I get another black mark by the moderator?  Who is Us? 37 Kittens might enjoy a little rock-n-roll song now and then.

Night Moves

Truly a remarkable song. Perfectly lyrical, perfectly sung.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies, Thompson. I posted that because I abhor rock music. I know Dylan (if that who it was) is an icon but he does nothing for me. I might have used an emoticon (indicating something akin to tongue n' cheek) but I try to use them as less as possible because the use of them destroys the intended effect. Still, i caught you unawares, as I guess I was caught unawares as well. It's good form let one know what is coming, but I don't want to really be all that stuffy about it. It was intended humor gone awry. Peace.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

In the sweet summertime summertime                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             

I remember  ... Lord, I remember                                                                   

💋

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Katie_G said:

In the sweet summertime summertime                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             

I remember  ... Lord, I remember                                                                   

💋

 

 

So Katie, it sounds like a '60 Chevy might hold some special memories for you too, eh?!  ;)

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

After computer problems for almost two weeks, I'm back with a slightly different version of my name. I'd just seen Tequila Sunrise before the computer crashed (no connection, I'm sure). Just as cigarjoe said that Cutter's Way worked for him for 4/5 of the way, then went off the rails, I could say the same thing about Tequila Sunrise. The precise moment of derailment was when Michelle Pfeiffer began saying, "I love you, I love you, I love you!" and I'm afraid I laughed out loud at the very ending. Partly because of the last fifth, this film seemed more like To Have and Have Not than The Big Sleep--noirish elements, but not noir. Till then, an enjoyable movie movie with four well-turned performances of different kinds:

1. Mel Gibson has the movie star/good-looking man/screen presence/"you can't take your eyes off me" role, and he does this a little better than Warren Beatty. Maybe the goofy charm he projects gives him an edge.

2. Kurt Russell (more appealing than Gibson to me, at least in this picture) has a real acting role which could have been in a different kind of film. His character of the possibly corrupt cop is believable, and Russell more than meets the challenge. Great reactions, and Russell keeps the audience guessing. It was amusing to learn from Eddie that Robert Towne based this character on Pat Riley, and Kurt Russell certainly had the slicked-back hair and the air of authority of the Lakers coach. Russell's performance was superb, I thought.

3. You could argue that Michelle Pfeiffer has the most difficult role, given that her character mixes the realism of Russell and the movie fantasy of Gibson, and she has to do that awful "I love you, I love you, I love you" scene and the bit at the end without breaking character or howling with inappropriate laughter. Not only is she gorgeous, she can act.

4. Raul Julia has an over-the-top theatricality which may stop just short of camp. Although I wouldn't praise his performance quite so highly as Ben and Eddie did, he's a blast of energy and a lot of fun.

It seems fitting that someone of Robert Towne's generation would create a film where the hero is a sensitive drug dealer. After all, for some of them, the purveyor of illegal substances often deserved as large a credit as the executive producers. See, the drug dealer gives his little boy a birthday party! Aw! With a magician, even! Aw! Gibson does have the best speech in the film, when he insists that no one actually wants him to quit selling drugs. A more serious, though not necessarily more enjoyable, film could have been built around that.

SPOILERS: I would preferred an ending where Gibson dies saving Russell's life, and with Russell consoling Pfeiffer, who didn't run into the surf. But that's me.

And weren't Pfeiffer, Russell, and Julia all about equally besotted with Mel Gibson?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, King Rat said:

1. Mel Gibson has the movie star/good-looking man/screen presence/"you can't take your eyes off me" role, and he does this a little better than Warren Beatty. Maybe the goofy charm he projects gives him an edge.

OT Alert

Never been much of a fan and reacted to distaste with the scandals but I was knocked for a loop when I saw him in The Professor and the Madman (2019). I am of the persuasion that is more likely not to make all that very much for the look of man (for those who don't know yet as I have been around here for awhile despite my avatar I am male) but since I am older and ,uh, wiser (maybe) I can finally cast off all the nonsense and see things as they really are (without reprisals and taunts) and it doesn't matter what persuasion one might be to plainly see what a magnificent specimen of a man Mel Gibson actually is this picture.  Older and sophisticated, playing the man who was responsible for the inception of the English Oxford Dictionary, he struck the figure of sensitivity and intelligence and looking brilliant with that mustache. An intimidated above I can't be the judge of such thing but I will say it anyway, he is more handsome now than he was when he was playing phony Braveheart and trying desperately to be Hamlet. He wasn't that awfully bad as Hamlet, after all he is not trained in the art of Shakespeare, but he wasn't that good either. Let's hope he doesn't try Lear. But I hope he keeps going with what he was as the professor because he seems to have a lot to offer in that department.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, 37kitties said:

Night Moves

Truly a remarkable song. Perfectly lyrical, perfectly sung.

I agree, but guess what?  The link to the song was deleted.  I think I deserve an explanation.  Take all the time you want.  I’m a patient man.  (37Kittens, do you still get the link, maybe it’s just me?)

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Thompson said:

I agree, but guess what?  The link to the song was deleted.  I think I deserve an explanation.  Take all the time you want.  I’m a patient man.  (37Kittens, do you still get the link, maybe it’s just me?)

That post is gone. I can't tell you why it was deleted because I don't know.

You would probably need to pm the moderator and ask if you want to  find out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thompson said:

I agree, but guess what?  The link to the song was deleted.  I think I deserve an explanation.  Take all the time you want.  I’m a patient man.  (37Kittens, do you still get the link, maybe it’s just me?)

Guess what! My humor-gone-awry post is gone too. Since mine preceded yours, then I am the culprit. All I said was something like, 'please warn us before you post a link' but even as I said it I certainly wasn't thinking that posting a link alone was anything to really get excited about. It was a jibe, though an un-emojied one. If a thought that I might have complained to the mods (IMO you probably did not think that but I mention this anyway) whisked through your mind, please be assured that i did not. As the King of Siam uttered, "It's a puzzlement."  I don't want to diss the mods (out of the respect I do have for them) but any attempt to get an explanation will probably be met with silence (if the past is any indication), but I would welcome one. Curiosity, curiosity, curiosity.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Vautrin’s YouTube post wasn’t deleted.  And yes, lafitte, it went through my mind. 37kittens, I was not referring to you when I said you.  The you I was referring to was the you that can delete posts.  What if this You fellow decides he doesn’t like a Dargo post so he deletes it?  So I challenge Mr. You to tell me exactly why the post was deleted.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/8/2021 at 7:09 PM, Bronxgirl48 said:

Just saw this in its entirety online.   Slack direction made it a slog for me, even though in my eyes Mitchum can do no wrong as an actor.

Best line:  "What's the matter, cathouse got your tongue?"

I didn't like that the character Anne Shirley played was eliminated entirely in the remake. Was she not in the novel? Charlotte Rampling's character was barely in the picture compared to Clare Trevor's and her first scene with Mitchum was awkward to say the least! In some ways better than the original, but in other ways WORSE!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Hibi said:

I didn't like that the character Anne Shirley played was eliminated entirely in the remake. Was she not in the novel? Charlotte Rampling's character was barely in the picture compared to Clare Trevor's and her first scene with Mitchum was awkward to say the least! In some ways better than the original, but in other ways WORSE!

I just re-read the novel (Farewell,  My Lovey),  a few months ago.     The character is in the book but she isn't the daughter of the rich man and step daughter of  his wife,  the femme fatale (Trevor character).      I really don't find her character that useful in the novel,  as well as believable.     I.e. she kind  of shows up out of nowhere for no reason and then disappears.      To me it is a flaw in the novel.

Thus I understand why both adaptations treated said character much differently.     I would have removed her 100% since I don't really like add-on romances in noir films (like the 44 version),  and she is just an unnecessary distraction (which for a movie verse a novel,  too many characters can gum-up the works).

  

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

That was an official video and you don't mess around with those. :)

 

Also In the novel Amthor was one of those con artist spiritualists that pop up in the novels,

not a very obese madam. The latter is a good excuse for showing lots of flesh, besides that

of the madam herself. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Vautrin said:

That was an official video and you don't mess around with those. :)

 

Also In the novel Amthor was one of those con artist spiritualists that pop up in the novels,

not a very obese madam. The latter is a good excuse for showing lots of flesh, besides that

of the madam herself. 

Also in the novel Amthor isn't killed by Moose but instead is caught by the police while trying to leave the country.    The movie version, especially the 44 one,  had Moose as a crazed killer willing to kill anyone on short notice.    I call that sloppy screenwriting.     I do enjoy how in the44 version Otto Kruger played the Amthor character and one of the best scenes in the film is when Marlowe and Amthor are feeling each other out.      I love the Amthor line that goes something like "thanks for making it easier on me" after Marlowe hits Amthor.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoyed Villain (1971) during the Richard Burton day, a film I had never heard of. Definitely one of Burton's better post-60s films, and one that would fit into another round of Neo-Noir. Based on the real-life criminal Ronnie Kray, Burton's character is sadistic, crazy, and homosexual, but nice to his aging mum. Ian McShane plays his boyfriend, sort of a thuggish bisexual Dudley Moore. Nigel Davenport plays the policeman trying to bring Burton to justice, a difficult task because the guy has dirt on prominent people.

I don't want to oversell the film, but if you like the genre, it's competently made. Thanks to those on the board who mentioned it, and thanks to TCM for this imaginative choice for Burton's day.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Also in the novel Amthor isn't killed by Moose but instead is caught by the police while trying to leave the country.    The movie version, especially the 44 one,  had Moose as a crazed killer willing to kill anyone on short notice.    I call that sloppy screenwriting.     I do enjoy how in the44 version Otto Kruger played the Amthor character and one of the best scenes in the film is when Marlowe and Amthor are feeling each other out.      I love the Amthor line that goes something like "thanks for making it easier on me" after Marlowe hits Amthor.

 

I haven't read the novel in several years so I have forgotten some of the details. Otto Kruger was always good as

the slick, well-spoken villain with a twinkle in his eye. Last night in Allotment Wives he was a little more sympathetic

than usual.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Vautrin said:

I haven't read the novel in several years so I have forgotten some of the details. Otto Kruger was always good as

the slick, well-spoken villain with a twinkle in his eye. Last night in Allotment Wives he was a little more sympathetic

than usual.

I also watched Allotment Wives and Otto Kruger was a little more sympathetic,  but a lot of that had to do with how he treated Francis.   

But in that early board-room scene after one of the gang makes a fuss and it is clear that he will make trouble,   someone says that they need to do something and Kruger says to Francis,  something like "don't worry,  it's being taken care of".      He said this in such a way like he was ordering a hamburger!      Oh,  and I would like cheese with that.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Thompson said:

Good song, but you have to admit those shorts sported by the guitar player are very girly.

Well a little girly. At least the shorts match the jacket. This has been an AC/DC trademark for so

long that I give Angus a break.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

I also watched Allotment Wives and Otto Kruger was a little more sympathetic,  but a lot of that had to do with how he treated Francis.   

But in that early board-room scene after one of the gang makes a fuss and it is clear that he will make trouble,   someone says that they need to do something and Kruger says to Francis,  something like "don't worry,  it's being taken care of".      He said this in such a way like he was ordering a hamburger!      Oh,  and I would like cheese with that.

 

 

Yeah, a very smooth, calm exterior, but at the end of the day he would get the job, however gruesome,

done.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

I just re-read the novel (Farewell,  My Lovey),  a few months ago.     The character is in the book but she isn't the daughter of the rich man and step daughter of  his wife,  the femme fatale (Trevor character).      I really don't find her character that useful in the novel,  as well as believable.     I.e. she kind  of shows up out of nowhere for no reason and then disappears.      To me it is a flaw in the novel.

Thus I understand why both adaptations treated said character much differently.     I would have removed her 100% since I don't really like add-on romances in noir films (like the 44 version),  and she is just an unnecessary distraction (which for a movie verse a novel,  too many characters can gum-up the works).

  

 

I see. Thanks. She did seem to be "there" in the film to supply some romance (or someone for Marlowe to bounce ideas off of). I kind of liked her though. The ending I'm sure was different from the novel!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...