Ford at Fox... and RKO, and MGM, and WB, and Columbia...

[MissGoddess]

Many thanks to you and Wally World, Kathy! The doc is a _treasure_.

[Film_Fatale]

> {quote:title=MissGoddess wrote:}{quote}

> The picture quality of the entire documentary is only middling.

 

But what about the other movies that come in the set? Granted I'm not going to be picky for something that sells for so little, but I'm still curious.

[MissGoddess]

Maybe Kathy can answer that, I haven't even looked at the other movies.

[MissGoddess]

I hope you all watched The Last Hurrah! It's an excellent movie about the end of an era,

not just the end of a politician.

[Film_Fatale]

I didn't watch it tonite, but I did watch it on DVD within the last 2-3 months. Great movie.

[JackFavell]

The Last Hurrah has a great supporting cast- Edward Brophy as Ditto just slays me....

[Film_Fatale]

Watching Pat O'Brien and Ricardo Cortez is also nice.

[MissGoddess]

> {quote:title=JackFavell wrote:}{quote}

> The Last Hurrah has a great supporting cast- Edward Brophy as Ditto just slays me....

 

Finally Eddie got to play a character who meant something. I just tear up when Skeffington

says goodbye to his little comrade. "How do you thank a man for a lifetime of laughs?" And

Ditto incorrigibly replies, "And who might dat be, boss?"

 

The last remaining figure as the camera pulls away is Eddie's, stooped and sadly going up the

stairs. I was worried about him! What's to happen to him now that his mentor/friend has passed

away? No one else valued him as much as Frank did. I think Ditto senses this, it's part of his

sadness.

[rohanaka]

But what about the other movies that come in the set?

 

I think if you are looking for film quality...this one will disapoint you. It is poor even by today's "regular TV" standards. But my main reason for buying the entire set was to get a copy of McClintock and Angel and the Badman...I don't shop on line and I don't get to very many video outlets....so for me to find even a bad copy of both of these films for only $5 at Walmart was worth it...and then to uncover the little gem of a documentary too was even better. This is one where you will just have to ignore the poor picture quality and focus on the content instead.

[MissGoddess]

Kathy,

 

Since *The Quiet Man* is your favorite, I thought I'd share a couple of things from J.A. Place's

book, The Non-Western Films of John Ford which I've nearly finished reading. I have in fact

learned a few things from this book, more so even than from Lindsay Anderson's book though

Lindsay's is more emotionally in synch with me. What J.A. Place says about some of the

themes in the movie interested me because, as usual with me, I'm slow at grasping such

things and how different elements can combine to express a theme. She's fairly good at

describing these things, though, like most film theorists she does err on the side of talking

over the head of a "lay" person like me and she also was suckered into a lot of Freudian

interpretations that I am always highly suspicious of; however, all that aside I was quite

fascinated by the following:

 

Like How Green Was My Valley (but with totally different effect), The Quiet Man is provided

with flashback structure through voice-over narration.....Michaeleen Oge Flynn (Barry Fitzgerald)

is both narrator and catalyst in the movment of the film, guiding Sean's journey into his own past

and commenting on it. Michaeleen is the chorus...In this highly classical and structured context,

Ford creates one of the most revolutionary films of the American cinema. (Wow!

Really? I did not know this. But, I'll bite.)

 

The journey into the past begins with the first images of the film. The visual steps in Sean's

passage into another time use movement in the direction of the past (in, toward the back of the

frame) and are marked by barriers which are passed through. The first shot of the film is the

train pulling into the station, blocking off one side of the frame. Sean is seen through the window,

looking through this, and once off the train, Michaeleen takes his bags, and without so much

as a by-your-leave, guides him to his next step. A pony cart (in contrast to the modernness of

the train) is framed through another window. It is like looking at a picture of the past and then

walking into it as Sean passes through the window. I never noticed these things, not once!

 

...The most revolutionary element of his journey is its economic foundation: it requires him to

give up romantic illusions and understand the economic basis of Mary Kate's (and thereby his)

relation to herself, her environment, and her husband...This economic base is represented by

Mary Kate's dowry. First, the only barrier Sean can understand to their marriage is the Squire's

refusal to allow the marriage and Mary Kate's refusal to go against her brother's order and flaunt

tradition...Sean must be made to realize the dowry's importance to her. It is her Innisfree---

when she first meets him she makes clear her place by seeing him in the parlor, where the

things are hers, in spite of the house belonging to her brother...When she speaks of "having

my things around me" he calls her materialistic and feels she doesn't love him enough, but

indeed, he hasn't yet come to respect her as a person with a traditional past she needs

just as he needs his. I thought she really captured something of what I always felt about

Mary Kate. A few months ago I posted several images of Mary Kate amongst her dear

things (as well as some similar of Claudette Colbert in Drums Along the Mohawk). I am

glad to see someone put into words what I always felt but couldn't articulate.

 

Place goes on with this theme:

 

....Only through the recovery of her past---as for him---can she be a whole person for him...

the promise cannot be fulfilled until he recognizes her need for the carrying out of her traditions

and comes to terms with his own feelings about money...

 

...When the Squire gives the "fortune", Sean goes to burn it, but is joined in the movement

in the frame visually by Mary Kate, who becomes his partner in destroying the money

and all it means to Sean. Having demanded it from the Squire restored her sense of self

and dignity; the money meant nothing to her. His guilt that he fought for money which

resulted in the accidental death of the man he was fighting is exorcised by the burning

of the money, and they are together able to accept each other on their own terms.

I never understood the burning of the money before---this sounds like a reasonable and

inspired explanation. No wonder I didn't get it, it's so deep!

[rohanaka]

Hi April--thanks for sharing this. It is very thought provoking....I have only one little aside--before I go on any further....wasn't the Father Lonergan the narrator (Ward Bond's character???) I always took the voice to be his...in fact at the beginning he even calls himself something like "that saintly looking character" Maybe I am wrong....or maybe the writer was confused--but it is still a really interesting commentary.

 

I like the part about stepping off the train and onto the pony cart....(I agree--it is very symbolic now that she mentions it)

 

The *"things about me"* thing is very important because for Mary Kate, it defines WHO she is as person and I think your author here has a good grasp on that.But I always saw the money as another matter altogether However, the aspect of the money as it related to his boxing career never really soaked in for me until reading your post....I always focused more on the death of his opponent as being his reason to avoid fighting...but money is a part of it too now that I have this context...And it makes perfect sense now that I think on it, because he even brings it up in his conversation with the vicar- "...and for what---filthy money"--(or something close to that) I knew he always told her the money didn't matter--but I never took it all the way to the "fighting for money" aspect of his past as being a part of the picture.

 

But the money as it relates to Mary Kate it is a different matter entirely--even she says it herself--when Sean tells her that he doesn't care about the money--she tells him that her brother DOES care, and that's the point. And I think _that_ is the main issue for her. Once she got her furniture and things..she expected her brother to carry through with the WHOLE agreement...and when he doesn't , she sees Sean's unwillingness to stand up to him as a weakness of character. So for Sean to finally give in, fight it out, and go get the money elevates him to the place in her mind she always wanted and expected for him to be. And then burning the money was the final "link" in the chain that tied them together as man and wife. (I mean that in a GOOD way--all you "marriage is a ball and chain" folks out there!) :-)

 

Very interesting piece...again--thanks for sharing it.

 

And PS-- *In this highly classical and structured context, Ford creates one of the most revolutionary films of the American cinema* HA!! I knew I should have put this film on my list of 5 Most Important Films a while back!! (Believe me--I did try--here's the proof I needed!! :-)

 

Message was edited by: rohanaka

[MissGoddess]

You're right, Ward Bond does do the opening and closing narrations...I could have sworn

Barry Fitzgerald did some in the middle but maybe I'm wrong just as she was??? I agree

with you, too about the added impetus Mary Kate has in wanting Sean to step up to Red

Will. The main thing I appreciate is that _tradition_ must be regarded by Sean before he

can really heal himself and everything can come together in his new life, and Mary Kate's.

 

So many things I have to think about next time I watch it!

 

Message was edited by: MissGoddess

[rohanaka]

Don't forget to look for the dopey little guy by the fireplace....I am still trying to figure that one out!! :-)

[movieman1957]

I wonder if Place meant that Fitzgerald carried the narrative as opposed to the narration. Not much happens that Flynn isn't involved in. The intoductions, the courtship, the guidance he gives to Thornton, the explanation on why Mary Kate has left Thornton, certainly the fight.

 

Of course, it could be just a plain oridinary mistake.

[MissGoddess]

> {quote:title=movieman1957 wrote:}{quote}

> I wonder if Place meant that Fitzgerald carried the narrative as opposed to the narration. Not much happens that Flynn isn't involved in. The intoductions, the courtship, the guidance he gives to Thornton, the explanation on why Mary Kate has left Thornton, certainly the fight.

>

> Of course, it could be just a plain oridinary mistake.

 

Good point, Chris. It could also be a typo---I found a couple in the book. She may have meant

"narrative" and they typed "narration".

 

I read Place's take on Mogambo, and, as usual, she overlooks most of the stuff Ford got in. Only

Tag Gallagher wrote at length about some of these things, everyone else, including the director

and actor, thought of it as just "a job of work".

[Film_Fatale]

Posted this already in the Westerns forum, but just in case nobody sees it there, what does everyone think of the segment from *How the West Was Won* directed by John Ford?

[MissGoddess]

Nice article here rom the Washington Post about what the sites used in *The Searchers* look like

today. There are pictures, too.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/05/AR2008090502090.html

[rohanaka]

the extraordinary landscape survives

 

Wow, April...what a great article. (Especially for a geology junkie like me--and considering the link to the Searchers and Ford..a double treat!)

 

I like how the author includes his love of the land...and the Searchers with interesting little conversations with the people throughout his tour. ( the bit about the weather and the radio--too funny) I like how he took stills from the film and went "searching" It's an interesting way to see what others might take for granted about both things...the film and the landscape.

 

Someday I'd love to go out there...(and having read this, it would be great fun to try and look for bits and pieces of recognizable locations like that.) We have traveled to several different parts of Missouri and Kentucky and taken numerous cave tours and done some hiking in a few of the more scenic places (we both are kind of hooked on stuff like that.) But I have never gotten the chance to go out that far west.(at least not south--Alaska was west...but too far north!) :-)

 

My husband went through the whole Monument Valley area decades ago....long before we ever met. And he has been telling me that one day we will take a vacation and go through there on the way to the Grand Canyon...but alas....things always seem to happen and we end up putting it off. And now that the kidling is a part of the picture, we will want to wait at least a couple more years so she will be old enough to remember it.

 

One day we'll make it...We always joke...it's not like it's going anywhere--and if it does...it won't matter anymore if we didn't get to see it. :-)

[MissGoddess]

I would love to visit there one day, too. I hope you and your family make it out there, but until

then, let Ethan be your guide.

[JackFavell]

I would love to go out there myself- can you see it, Ro?

 

I am on the tour and say to no one in particular, "I have always wanted to see John Ford country." The woman on my right turns and looks at me with a big smile and says, "Oh, did you see The Searchers?" and I say "I love that movie!" and she says, "I like The Quiet Man juuuust a little bit better." I turn to her and say, "Kathy????" and you turn and look at me and say, "Wendy???" and we both just bust out laughing......

[rohanaka]

HA!!!!! I would LOVE that if it happened. And then from across the way we here....HEY!! You two...it's me...APRIL!! This could be like the Family reunion we never had! :-) (Everybody ...sing with me...It's a small world afterall!" )

 

PS-- and we both just bust out laughing......

 

I am bringing some wet wipes just in case...you know...if you forget to put your soda down before we both crack up!! :-)

[MissGoddess]

Hi everyone! I just watched the most wonderful John Ford movie for the first time: *FLESH*. He

made it for MGM in 1932, with Wallace Beery after he won the Oscar for THE CHAMP. Oh

my, you all HAVE to see this movie, it was so great! Beery plays this big, dumb, sweet ox

who's a German wrestler in love with this rather no-good girl fresh from prison, played by Karen

Morley in a performance that should have gotten her an Oscar---she was that good. I mean

she's that good at playing no good. She's really using this poor mug all through the film when

the guy she really loves, pathetically, is the rat played by Ricardo Cortez (wasn't he the king

of rats?) and she'll stop at NOTHING for "her man," even if it destroys the poor, decent guy

who really cares about her. Because, of course, Cortez treats her like dirt and of course

she loves him even more for it. All this sounds like it could be so melodramatic and sappy

but it's DIRECTED so exceptionally well and Morley is given the time and scope to develop

her character from a rather hard to like, hard boiled woman to one who is truly torn in her soul

between the man who's been her single obsession and the one who's laid his whole life

and self at her feet, and who's even willing to sacrifice his honor for her (sound familiar?) But

because it's Ford, she's never presented as "evil;" right from the beginning he gives us a

reason to at least understand her---the awful prison she emerges from, though shown only in

one brief sequence, is harrowing enough to define her empty shell and bitterness toward

any who might wish to aid her. Beery, bless him, he really could take a part like this and

make it completely believable. I think he's better here than in *The Champ* because more

is demanded of him. When he finally gives up the last element of his being for this woman,

his honor, after she's taken everything else, he descends into alcoholic self-loathing and

it makes it possible for Morley to react, finally, as a human being. These moments are played

out, in familiar fashion for a director who started in silents, with unspoken gestures or a specific

point of view from the camera.

 

All in all just a fine movie that deserves to be seen by a wider audience and I can't thank

Chris enough for sending me a copy. :)

 

I will request TCM to air it and hopefully if I pester them enough they can schedule it, maybe

for some sports themed night. It made me think of Ron Howard's *Cinderella Man*, in that it

is about a guy who doesn't want to fight crooked. But it's better, sorry Ronnie.

 

[JackFavell]

repeat post

 

Message was edited by: JackFavell

[JackFavell]

That sounds so good, Goddess! I really love Wallace Beery. I hear he wasn't so nice, but I don't care.

 

I love the picture- Ford's doing his best Jimmy Cagney impersonation, trying to look tough, even though he is really a big tub of mush.....

[rohanaka]

It made me think of Ron Howard's Cinderella Man

 

Again with the boxing!!! :-) (Didn't we just have a conversation about this a while back??)

 

I think this story just sounds so emotional. And --my favorite word lately--poignant. I hope your pestering pays off!