The Annual FrankGrimes Torture Thread

[movieman1957]

Airgrams were these telegram like notes that parents and/or friends would have read over the loudspeaker to their kids. They were usually dumb and not funny but full of love and parental support. I think the band sold them as a way to raise some money.

 

I only did one. It was for Maureen but only at Carolann's insistence. Maureen thought it was funny so it worked.

 

If only I could type.

[JackFavell]

That's so sweet! I wouldn't know if we did them or not... my parents never went to any of the football games or competitions when we played. My mom might have sent one of those, but my dad...never.

[FrankGrimes]

Ciao, Little Red Buick! -- I'm impressed by your commenting on all those films! Wow! And even more impressed by your having seen most of them. That's remarkable.

 

*My computer crashed again last night. I don't know how long I can chat with this problem.*

 

What's going on with your computer?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*I think, like many of the films you described here, the film's execution is a bit lacking. It's why Billy Wilder started directing his own films. That being said, I just love this movie! You are right, it starts out as cold as can be, but as Boyer starts to change, I find it irresistible.*

 

 

That could be a big reason why it eluded me. I'm usually a sucker for such love stories, but I just didn't have the strong feelings for Charles and Olivia by the end.

 

 

*And Olivia is such a good actress.... do you know how hard it is to play the good one? That takes real talent. Her reactions are so sincere.*

 

 

I loved the character she played, so I should have loved her. Maybe Olivia is a big reason why I couldn't fall for the film. She's very hit or miss with me.

 

 

*I agree about Paulette, she's a pistol, as usual, but there's a real bite to her here.*

 

 

I agree. She's scorned, which I love. She reminded me of Carolyn Jones in *A Hole in the Head*. Actually, the film is a little bit similar with some of the characters, namely those played by Charles, Olivia, and Paulette. You could even stretch it to include Walter Abel, who is the disapproving "big brother" in the picture. Anita (Paulette Goddard) wants to keep twisting in the wind, playing the same game with Georges (Charles Boyer). Georges starts to grow up by film's end.

 

 

*And there's a not so nice background, very seedy, as MissG said.*

 

 

It's a seedy background for sure. The background is actually similar to that of *A Hole in the Head*.

 

 

*It's the more cynical Wilder coming out. I think if Wilder had directed, you might have liked the movie more. I love the whole vacation sequence, and Boyer can pull off anything and make you believe. I think the main problem with the film is the direction... you see the strings being pulled, but baby, I don't care! *

 

 

I guess I felt Georges transformation was rather sudden. I'm going to use the word again, "tormented." I feel the torment with Tony (Frank Sinatra) in *A Hole in the Head*. I didn't feel that with Georges.

 

 

*I hadn't even heard of it until you mentioned it. I'll try to give it a try, if I can get a hold of it.*

 

 

*Le Notti Bianche* is a Criterion film, so you should be able to track it down.

 

 

If you want to see what the film looks like, here is a link:

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aggKOWCVKBw

 

 

The problem is, the subtitles are not included. And when you use the translator at YouTube, it's a total mess. I suggest renting the film.

 

 

 

 

*I really liked that movie. I agree, Sarah is more simple, childlike. That's a great description. She's grown in body but not in heart. At least until the end of the movie. I used to love Sarah when I was a kid, I thought she was very pretty, I used to watch THOSE MAGNIFICENT MEN IN THEIR FLYING MACHINES when it was on TV.*

 

 

I didn't know she was in that. *Term of Trial* is the first time I've seen her, I believe. She's excellent in that film. *Ryan's Daughter* ends up being an extension of that film, almost.

 

 

*No! Now I see that they were pretty good at that time. I just rebelled against the songs I heard over and over and over. I wasn't a big disco fan.*

 

 

Oh, I completely get that. I did that with some artists in the late-80s, such as The Cure. I was into rap music so much.

 

 

*That was a great scene. Very quiet. Howard has a sixth sense about things, just like Michael. He knows when something is in the air. I don't think they make religious men like that anymore, or at least not often. He never judged or came down with pronouncements, he knew that Rosy was human, and was only trying to help her understand how dangerous it was for her to follow her instincts.*

 

 

That's very nicely said. I agree. He wasn't looking to belittle and condemn. He was purely looking to remind and warn. He was leaving it up to the individual to make their own conscious decisions. When we're caught in our fits of wrongful behavior, we often look to silence our conscious. Father Collins (Trevor Howard) was the kind wake-up call.

 

 

*But your noir characters are all like this!*

 

 

Oh, yes, definitely. But the reason they are selfish is usually for a gain I get. Thomas Ryan's (Leo McKern) reasons for blowing in the wind are simply due to cowardice to stand for anything. I usually despise such characters.

 

 

*You know I like to peek around the corner at the folks less looked at.*

 

 

How poetic!

 

 

*It didn't really surprise me that he was the informant... Lean set it up perfectly with the photograph of him and the IRA hero shaking hands. What really blew my mind was his reaction to his daughter's possible fate, I mean they could have stoned or raped her, not just cut off her hair and paraded her naked around the town. And yet, he could not bring himself to tell. To me, that was the most interesting part of the story. It's epic, it's Shakespearean, it's tragic.*

 

 

That really was Shakespearean. And I fully expected a worse treatment of Rosy than what she received. I guess it's all about shame.

 

 

*You put that so well, 'guilty ignorance'. This is something I've never understood about human nature. The need to tear down what you don't understand so you can feel better than.*

 

 

We humans are an insecure bunch that are always seeking the approval of others. Even the most individualistic of people have this in them. It's unavoidable. The other thing humans love is power. Some of us don't even realize we love it because we seek it on smaller levels. But the bullying of the townsfolk is on a larger level. It's far more difficult to face a crowd than join one.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*I would agree with that, except I'm not sure he was simply using Michael. It fell in his lap and he didn't have much choice. I think Doryan was as trapped in his role as any of the others in the movie. Yes, ultimately he was a user.*

 

 

By film's end, I got the feeling he was purposely using Michael. But before that, I didn't. It's all about their scenes on the beach. It felt like Doryan and Michael were rather familiar with each other.

 

 

*And this is where I really am not sure about Christopher Jones as an actor... did Lean WANT a cipher? Someone who could not be read? Or would another actor have shown us Doryan's problems better? I just don't quite know what to make of the character, and I think it's the actor who is blank, perhaps not Lean's choice. He's kind of Lawrence of Arabia....you never really know where he falls as he straddles the fence.*

 

 

That's a great question. The way Doryan comes off is that he's a tin soldier. He's shellshocked and frail. The flashbacks support this. But I have no idea if that's Lean's choice or the actor's ability.

 

 

*I think he's committed to his duty, to his life back home, which is not all that wonderful. But he is also trapped by it. I think Rosy sees his weakness, his humanity under it all, or at least she thinks she sees it. I think at first she would liked to have run off with him, but by the end I don't think she cared at all about whether he had other commitments. She understood him. They simply needed one another. Just the same, she understood her father and his weakness.*

 

 

 

That's quite brilliant. I think you're right. Rosy probably does understand Doryan and then her father because it's the same feelings inside of her that led her astray. She probably still loves Charles but Charles doesn't provide for her in the physical and emotional. So what does a person do in such a circumstance? It's one thing to say your mate doesn't like something like gardening. You can find outlets to fill that need, innocent ones. But what if they don't like intimacy and sex? That can be a marital prison that's hard to handle. Physical desires are strong currents to deny. And what's worse is that if you do go astray and experience those feelings, they are hard to move on from, to put aside. You may always find yourself going back to them in your mind. That's where Rosy is now and Charles even brings this up with her.

 

 

*I think the film is enjoyable for seeing these two actors turn their own images on their ear. Bing gets me. I'm still laughing over what MissG said about Grace crying over her wardrobe....*

 

 

 

I did like Bing in this film. The character felt very true. The only thing that didn't ring true to me was the tragedy in the film. It felt forced and unbelievable.

 

 

*I mentioned The Wild One earlier, what I was trying to say was, the disappointment in ones parents is prevalent in the other film, but isn't the actual story,*

 

 

I'll probably be posting my next group of films this weekend. I have two to watch. But for the next group, I'm going to watch *The Wild One*. Then I'll understand what you are referring to.

 

 

*Do you think kids were disappointed in their parents before WWII? I mean in general, not specific cases. We came through this great war, full of hero worship, and then the next generation comes along and finds that their dads can't even stand up to their bosses or their wives. It's interesting how the modern world made sheep out of men who had previously been heroes to their kids. What happened? Was it a basic change in our economy, from field to desk jobs? I just don't know.*

 

 

Now that's an excellent question. I know I'm not qualified to answer it. I'm sure the aftereffects of World War II played a major role in sculpting the American home, particularly in the 50s. What Nicholas Ray tapped into was a disrespect that the youth may have been feeling at the time. The disrespect led to a rebellion of sorts. Was the Cold War also one between parents and children?

 

 

*Again with the torment! Now I know what to look for in movies you might like.*

 

 

Oh, I absolutely love torment. Tormented love is my favorite. I've never experienced love. I've had great feelings of love inside of me, but I've never been able to make them real. So I'm completely tormented, hence my seeking it in film.

 

 

*If you are like me, you enjoy the kind of blooming Lean's characters experience, as they come out of their closets.... metaphysically speaking. The inner comes out.*

 

 

That's deep! What I have loved about Lean is that there is a great deal of emotional honesty and dishonesty found within his primary characters. Take *Brief Encounter*. Laura (Celia Johnson) isn't really looking to have an affair, but she runs into a man who shows her interest. They become friends and the friendship starts to create a feeling of love. These feelings are honest. Laura ends up returning to her husband, so now she has to deal with dishonest feelings. I've seen four other Lean films with the exact same premise, just with slight twists and different "attire."

 

 

If one is lucky, they find all of their feelings, needs, and desires fulfilled by one person. I'd say many people do find this. However, there will always be someone who may do something even better for you than your mate. The trick is not falling in love with another, even though they may be exciting you at that moment or for many moments.

 

 

I feel marriages are getting to be more and more difficult to maintain because what people want in life seems to be changing and our ideas of being able to have it all create a selfish impatience. Those who are content with simple pleasures and love have a far greater chance at a happy marriage than those who need constant stimulation. And what is our world all about now? Constant stimulation and immediate gratification. I don't know how any marriage is going to succeed in the future.

 

 

Can we honestly express our feelings to our loved one? We love to hide.

 

 

*This sounds so good! We as movie fans must certainly understand these feelings... go for the real, or the imaginary?*

 

 

Excellent point! You're a dreamer, so I believe you are going to understand the feelings of *Le Notti Bianche*. I think you'll love the setting, too. It's a simple yet stylish presentation.

 

 

*My favorite Woody Allen film The Purple Rose of Cairo deals with just this dilemma. I think you'd like it.*

 

 

 

I've never really watched much Woody but I'd probably love his work since he's a neurotic who focuses on relationships.

 

 

*I've got it! Now to watch it, if the copy actually works... I'm getting paranoid about this movie...*

 

 

Are you afraid I've built it up too much? No worries. You'll love the overall feelings within and message of the film, and you'll adore the camerawork. It screams "you."

 

 

*The ending really does makes the film. A true love story. I think this is one of Price's best from that time. The thing that's amazing is its a true story.*

 

 

I know! It's such an amazing story.

 

 

 

 

*I just love Raoul Walsh for all the reasons you mentioned. There is no one who can have as much jaunty fun making a movie as Walsh. The men are such a good fit together, and of course you've got Flynn and Hale again, the perfect combo. You are right, even Reagan is loose and comfortable looking here. Walsh = pure adventure.*

 

 

Walsh is off and on with me. I usually don't find much emotion in his films with the exception of the ones I really like, such as *High Sierra*. But this film definitely scored with me. There's some hidden emotion in it, as well.

 

 

In this group of films, this is the film I'd select for Quiet Gal to watch. I think she'd really enjoy it. I think her husband would, too.

 

 

*I haven't seen it for years but I always thought this was Hope's best movie, now I'd say this one and Lemon Drop Kid.*

 

 

I have really liked three of the "Hope" films that I've recently watched. *My Favorite Brunette* and *The Lemon Drop Kid* are two of them. I also enjoyed *The Cat and the Canary*. And I can't say Hope is the main reason, either. He's a big part of those films, but there has been more to it with them. In terms of comedy, I have liked Hope a bit more with the "Road" pictures.

 

 

*It's not as complex as some other noirs, but it looks great and the acting is good. I really get the Lured connection. To me it's like the Columbo (Peter Falk) prototype.*

 

 

I never really watched Columbo. Are you saying it's a prototype for the show or character?

 

 

*I really like this one, even though it's all over the place. Maybe that's why I like it! It goes everywhere, is every type of movie you could want. It's part drama, part adventure, part GWTW, part screwball. What's not to like?*

 

 

You're right, it really is a menagerie. I'm still blown away by the fact that Ray Milland is the "good guy" and Duke becomes more of a "bad guy." There's a little bit of *The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance* with that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*This is another one of those films like Robin Hood that just makes me happy.The story was a chestnut when it was made, already old fashioned, but Colman has such a light touch here, he doesn't take any of it seriously. I love watching him as the drunkard king... it's so different from his usual roles and it's exciting to me to see him as a scoundrel. And he and Maddie are divine together, their teasing at first and then the realization that they love one another but it can never work out.... I am a sucker for nobility. And you are absolutely right, Doug, jr. is great. He is marvelously slimy and you can't take your eyes off of him. Every person pulls their weight in the cast, right down to little Byron Foulger as the informant who gets killed opening the gate. Of course, I am a fan of ANY movie that has more than one villain, Massey is cold, mean and stunted, and Doug, jr is simply a psycho! Again, what's not to love? It gets me every time.*

 

 

I can definitely see how you'd really enjoy this one. Ronald Colman is certainly quite good, here. He's a far different kind of hero than Errol Flynn, though. He's still very enjoyable. The film is a good companion with *A Tale of Two Cities*.

 

 

I was hoping for more of Madeleine Carroll, but she wasn't around that much. But I really did enjoy Fairbanks, Jr. and Massey. And the ending is pretty exciting. I like your mentioning Foulger. That's very "you."

 

 

*I had no idea it was a Rene Clair movie! I've got to see it pronto! He's a favorite, I even like I Married a Witch, which to me is his weakest movie. If that's the weakest, then he's doing really well. Have you seen any other Rene movies? My favorite is Le Million.*

 

 

I never heard of *Le Million*. Is it available on YouTube? I'm guessing *The Flame of New Orleans* is probably lesser than *I Married a Witch*. That's one I've yet to see. I just thought the film was charming. It's a nice change of pace for Marlene. I liked seeing her this way. She's always engaging to me.

 

 

Of Clair's work, I have also seen *It Happened Tomorrow* and *And Then There Were None*. I like both of those films.

 

 

*I wonder if you don't initially buy the love story? If you dislike Boyer so much at the beginning that you can't feel a sense of redemption at the end, then it won't work for you. I just think his changeover is great. So romantic. I know you are having trouble with Olivia... have you seen The Strawberry Blonde yet? Speaking of marriage movies?*

 

 

I do believe it's my not falling for the love story as to why I didn't like the film all that much. I didn't find Boyer as alluring and Olivia is a little too sterile for me. It is true, I never felt their romance.

 

 

*Yes but what did you think of it? I did not know where this one was going to go... I had no idea what it was about when I watched so I was at first taken aback by the way they reacted to their separation, then I thought it was brilliant, and I loved the way it all worked out. It's not a perfect movie, but it enjoyable and a bit modern, shocking to me from a 1940's film.*

 

 

I thought it was okay. I like Robert Donat when he he's more like "*The 39 Steps*" and not like "Mr. Chips." He was more like the latter, here. I like Deborah Kerr as a mouse, so she played well with me. I did think the story was rather bold for its time. I like how they both fall victim and expect the other to be devastated when told the news. It ends up being a rather sweet story.

 

 

I do agree with the premise of the film, too. I think we create our own situations. We can do something to change our unhappiness if only we attempted to do so. But we always assume our mate is content and will not change. Again, it's about communication and expressing one's thoughts. Having said that, we all get comfortable and it sometimes takes an outside force to disrupt our routines, to save us from ourselves.

 

 

*This one is a disappointment. Doesn't really present the good side of any of the actors.*

 

 

I actually really enjoyed Franchot Tone. He was doing all he could to win over Jean Harlow. I think it's more his film than Jean's. I also thought Patsy Kelly was fun.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Does this one have Joseph Calleia in it? I thought I recognized the title but I have never seen it.*

 

 

No, your Joe isn't in this one.

 

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0049405/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

 

 

*I would like to see this one, the bits I've seen are gorgeous looking, and that goes a long way for me.*

 

 

Like I said, it has all the elements, but it just doesn't come together for me.

 

 

*This is a film everyone has mentioned and yet I've still never seen it. It's high on my list.*

 

 

I really liked Sylvia Sidney. It's one of her most dramatic performances.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*I started to watch because of Simone, who is greatin everything I've ever seen her in. I usually don't care for British films of this time period or type. I really liked it, but simply because of Olivier and Signoret's twisted relationship. Their acting is impeccable. Loved the ending.*

 

 

So what don't you like about this period of British film? I thought you loved everything British! What I liked about the film is the temptation. It is always flattering for a man to have a woman or even girl want you. *Term of Trial* captures this well. You really have to have a strong commitment to push such temptation away. I still feel Graham (Laurence Olivier) crosses a line in his actions. If a teacher today did what he does, they'd really be done for.

 

 

*I like it! It's phony and ridiculous. So much fun to make fun of. And when else are you going to see Reginald Gardiner get such a plum of a role? Ginger is a bit off.*

 

 

That's funny! I always expect everyone to hate the film. Ginger is what is off for me. She's trying too hard. I feel for her because she was stuck in that horrible time for actresses of middle age. You make a great point about Reginald Gardiner. Who knew?! I liked the film from the outset. I was loving Peggy Ann Garner.

 

 

*I totally agree, and I went in with the same thought, that I would hate it. It's one of De Mille's best. Jimmy is just great. Period.*

 

 

I'm surprised more people don't talk well of Jimmy's performance in this film. It's such a brave role to play. I can see why he wanted to play it, too. It fits him. He makes the film.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Have you seen De Mille's Cleopatra? With Claudette Colbert? That's another of my favorites. It's got all that De Mille crap in it, but it works.*

 

 

No, I haven't. What do you like about it?

 

 

*I'm really surprised this one didn't rate higher. I thought it was very interesting. I loved Errol John and Frankie in this one. And Virna is a knockout who can act.*

 

 

Virna is definitely a knockout. I just thought the film was too outragerous and it took forever to get anywhere and once we got there, it was over in a blink.

 

 

*Ack! This is not for me. I don't generally like late Ginger. She always seems to me to be trying to be something more than she is and it bugs me.*

 

 

I agree with that completely. She's trying so darn hard. And what makes her great with Fred? She feels natural. Women want to be like her and men want to be with her.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*It's fun!*

 

 

I've found classic film as an older guy, so my want to see anything "kiddie" in the classic world is very low. Now if I had grown up with *The Parent Trap*, maybe I would have liked it more. But it really is quite "girly."

[Bronxgirl48]

Frank, I didn't know you were such a fan of tormented love, lol, so I do recommend, if you haven't already seen it, GOODBYE AGAIN. Of course, your enjoyment of this movie will no doubt mainly depend on how you feel about Bergman's "Paula" (she, like Jean Seberg in BONJOUR TRISTESSE, comes full circle....) and whether you can accept her relationship with (miscast) Tony Perkins. All three characters in GA are pretty much hot messes -- tremendously needy and therefore delusional. When I mentioned that GA reminded me of BONJOUR TRISTESSE, I had no idea that Francoise Sagan penned "Aimez-vous Brahms?", the story on which GOODBYE AGAIN is adapted! If one missed the opening credits, it would be easy to assume that GA was directed by Preminger as a companion piece of sorts to BT. There are emotionally misguided protagonists residing in glamourous, elegant settings; veneers of sophistication masking vulnerability and yearning; similiar musical themes; plus a world-weary chanteuse in both, singing bittersweet, cynical odes on the nature of love.

 

Edited by: Bronxgirl48 on Apr 6, 2013 1:11 AM

[MissGoddess]

*the baron of arizona* and *the flame of new orleans* are two movies that i didn't know what to expect from and ended up liking them very much. it's been a long time since I saw flame, i simply remember liking it very much. price and the story are terrific in baron.

 

i might add that *the wild one* surprised me too. i expected to dislike it, but i actually prefer it to rebel. i never expect to like brando's films, ha!

 

*le notti bianchi* sounds lovely, i may have to rent that one. *la collectionneuse* sounds like i would hate it so I won't even bother. BRONXIE: *claire's knee* i remember seeing on PBS years ago. its mood stayed with me but little else.

 

i agree about jimmy and *the greatest show on earth*. his character is wonderful. SPOILER! sort of like david jannsen's "the fugitive".

 

i really like *the killer is loose* and *crack-up*, especially the latter. not towering films, but just the kind that go down easily and with just enough grit to make things interesting. i never thought wendell had it in him. he's beyond CREEPY.

 

i have to see *desperate journey* now. i thought i'd seen it but nothing is ringing a bell. i keep thinking by the title it's that one with ann sheridan and errol flynn that i did not like much, about WWII resistance efforts in Norway or some such place.

 

i'd say you still have errol's best westerns ahead of you. i know you don't care for olivia, but *dodge city* is quite fun and gorgeous looking to boot. alan hale and errol were quite a team.

 

i always found *journey into fear* a total disappointment, and agree with your words about it. all the ingredients are there but the soup tastes flat.

 

i have to confess i could not finish *term of trial*. like jackie, there are certain films of this period in Brit cinema which i can't really warm to, the "kitchen sink" variety, and this is a prime example. i prefer *personal affair* a thousand times to it. i also prefer *to sir, with love* a thousand times to it! i'm not a huge fan of Simone Signoret, either. A woman who never smiled once in her career is not my cuppa. I do think she was a terrific actress, though---there's no denying that. but many great actresses leave me cold.

 

one movie of this period, also british, which i prefer, is *room at the top*. simone is more sympathetic. actually, lex luthor would come off sympathetic compared to the star, laurence harvey, who's a real swine in it!

 

it's here, in parts, on youtube:

 

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLz0fabMSE4fRKRWlfjO5Vtq7gbeG4Olz0

[FrankGrimes]

Ciao, Fordy Guns! -- *the baron of arizona and the flame of new orleans are two movies that i didn't know what to expect from and ended up liking them very much. it's been a long time since I saw flame, i simply remember liking it very much. price and the story are terrific in baron.*

 

Now this actually surprises me. I didn't think *The Baron of Arizona* would be to your liking. It just didn't feel like your kind of film. I could see you liking some of *The Flame of New Orleans*, but I thought Bruce Cabot being the man of Marlene's affection would hold it back for you.

 

*i might add that the wild one surprised me too. i expected to dislike it, but i actually prefer it to rebel. i never expect to like brando's films, ha!*

 

More surprises! I'd rarely guess you liking a Brando film, especially one called *The Wild One*.

 

*le notti bianchi sounds lovely, i may have to rent that one.*

 

I think you would be all right with it. It captures longing and loneliness quite well. I like how the two characters start to become fond of each other. There are some interesting moments that go with this learning.

 

*la collectionneuse sounds like i would hate it so I won't even bother. BRONXIE: claire's knee i remember seeing on PBS years ago. its mood stayed with me but little else.*

 

You'd loathe it. It's a film about nothing with characters you'd completely hate. The two guys are the kind of guys you'd spit on. You'd actually start to think I was good after seeing them!

 

*i agree about jimmy and the greatest show on earth. his character is wonderful. SPOILER! sort of like david jannsen's "the fugitive".*

 

Yes, that's exactly it. I knew Jimmy played a clown in the film but I didn't know his role would be that meaningful. Now I understand why he played a clown.

 

*i really like the killer is loose and crack-up, especially the latter. not towering films, but just the kind that go down easily and with just enough grit to make things interesting. i never thought wendell had it in him. he's beyond CREEPY.*

 

I agree with all of that. You're very right about Wendell Corey. He's really good in *The Killer Is Loose*.

 

*i have to see desperate journey now. i thought i'd seen it but nothing is ringing a bell. i keep thinking by the title it's that one with ann sheridan and errol flynn that i did not like much, about WWII resistance efforts in Norway or some such place.*

 

Oh, that's *Edge of Darkness*. That one is coming up for me. *Desperate Journey* doesn't have a romantic angle to it, but it's really exciting. The pacing is superb.

 

*i'd say you still have errol's best westerns ahead of you. i know you don't care for olivia, but dodge city is quite fun and gorgeous looking to boot. alan hale and errol were quite a team.*

 

I will watch that in the next group. I've been trying to watch at least one Flynn film in each group.

 

*i always found journey into fear a total disappointment, and agree with your words about it. all the ingredients are there but the soup tastes flat.*

 

You just said it way better than I did. I also thought Orson Welles was poorly used. He must have been busy "directing" the film.

 

*i have to confess i could not finish term of trial.*

 

Now this sounds like you!

 

*like jackie, there are certain films of this period in Brit cinema which i can't really warm to, the "kitchen sink" variety, and this is a prime example.*

 

Oh, yes, you are very right about that. This one is very thick with what you don't like.

 

*i prefer personal affair a thousand times to it.*

 

So do I. I really liked that film. It's a "hidden gem."

 

*i also prefer to sir, with love a thousand times to it! i'm not a huge fan of Simone Signoret, either. A woman who never smiled once in her career is not my cuppa. I do think she was a terrific actress, though---there's no denying that. but many great actresses leave me cold.*

 

I can certainly believe that. She's a mood all to herself.

 

*one movie of this period, also british, which i prefer, is room at the top. simone is more sympathetic. actually, lex luthor would come off sympathetic compared to the star, laurence harvey, who's a real swine in it!*

 

I do have that one recorded. I didn't know it was British.

 

 

[MissGoddess]

> Now this actually surprises me. I didn't think *The Baron of Arizona* would be to your liking. It just didn't feel like your kind of film. I could see you liking some of *The Flame of New Orleans*, but I thought Bruce Cabot being the man of Marlene's affection would hold it back for you.

>

 

I really did enjoy Baron. It moved and was extremely engaging. I would like to see it again some day. I think of Flame as part of my early days watching classic film, and I was just discovering Marlene. I honestly can't say how I'd like it today but I remember it had charm, and I thought Clair was a good fit with Marlene.

 

> More surprises! I'd rarely guess you liking a Brando film, especially one called *The Wild One*.

>

 

I liked the girl character, who Jackie mentioned is the town lawman's daughter only he hasn't much backbone. Enter Marlon, who's hot on his motorcycle and all dangerous which is a thrill for her. But she's still a good girl and Marlon's trouble but he is actually quite good. He's the opposite of James Dean, he's more like the original "Fonz", lol. Ultra cool. I can see all the fifties teenage guys wanting to be like him, ha ha. Then there's Lee. In a way, it's kind of like a television show (the look is very low budget, studio bound).

 

The Dick Van Dyke show made a funny riff on this movie, called "Vroom-Vroom".

 

> I think you would be all right with it. It captures longing and loneliness quite well. I like how the two characters start to become fond of each other. There are some interesting moments that go with this learning.

>

 

That screenshot you posted reminded me of a Frank Borzage silent, like *Street Angel*, for some reason.

 

> You'd loathe it. It's a film about nothing with characters you'd completely hate. The two guys are the kind of guys you'd spit on. You'd actually start to think I was good after seeing them!

>

 

boy, they must be low.

 

> Yes, that's exactly it. I knew Jimmy played a clown in the film but I didn't know his role would be that meaningful. Now I understand why he played a clown.

>

 

This character really grounds the picture, keeps it from being all spectacle and soap suds.

 

> I agree with all of that. You're very right about Wendell Corey. He's really good in *The Killer Is Loose*.

>

 

Ironically, his dead steady, beady eyes made me think of Raymond Burr in the other movie he was in, *Rear Window*.

 

> You just said it way better than I did. I also thought Orson Welles was poorly used. He must have been busy "directing" the film.

>

 

And I can't even remember Orson's character, I only think of him as the director, lol.

 

> I do have that one recorded. I didn't know it was British.

>

 

Veddy, veddy. But it's all about class distinctions. At first, I want to feel sympathy for Larry's character in a post-war sort of misfit way, but oy, he kills that pretty quick. One gets the feeling he's not acting with these roles!

[FrankGrimes]

*I really did enjoy Baron. It moved and was extremely engaging. I would like to see it again some day.*

 

"Engaging" is a good word for it. It's quite a journey for the "Baron" (Vincent Price).

 

*I think of Flame as part of my early days watching classic film, and I was just discovering Marlene. I honestly can't say how I'd like it today but I remember it had charm, and I thought Clair was a good fit with Marlene.*

 

That's yet another great word: "charm." It really is a charming film.

 

 

*I liked the girl character, who Jackie mentioned is the town lawman's daughter only he hasn't much backbone. Enter Marlon, who's hot on his motorcycle and all dangerous which is a thrill for her. But she's still a good girl and Marlon's trouble but he is actually quite good. He's the opposite of James Dean, he's more like the original "Fonz", lol. Ultra cool. I can see all the fifties teenage guys wanting to be like him, ha ha. Then there's Lee. In a way, it's kind of like a television show (the look is very low budget, studio bound).*

 

Which Lee? I may like it if he's like the "Fonz."

 

*The Dick Van Dyke show made a funny riff on this movie, called "Vroom-Vroom". *

 

That was a cute episode.

 

*That screenshot you posted reminded me of a Frank Borzage silent, like Street Angel, for some reason.*

 

Oh, yeah? I do love the look of the film. It's all a set, but I liked that about it.

 

 

*boy, they must be low. *

 

They are! But you make a good point, they may not be that low.

 

 

*This character really grounds the picture, keeps it from being all spectacle and soap suds.*

 

That's a very good point. Buttons (James Stewart) is the heart and conscience.

 

*Ironically, his dead steady, beady eyes made me think of Raymond Burr in the other movie he was in, Rear Window.*

 

I think he's much crazier than him!

 

*And I can't even remember Orson's character, I only think of him as the director, lol.*

 

And he didn't direct the film! Orson plays a Turkish colonel. It's an odd role for him. And not that interesting.

 

*Veddy, veddy. But it's all about class distinctions. At first, I want to feel sympathy for Larry's character in a post-war sort of misfit way, but oy, he kills that pretty quick. One gets the feeling he's not acting with these roles!*

 

Or he's one heckuva an actor! I've only seen Laurence in two films, so I'm not sure what he's all about, really.

[MissGoddess]

> Which Lee? I may like it if he's like the "Fonz."

>

 

Lee Marvin.

 

> Oh, yeah? I do love the look of the film. It's all a set, but I liked that about it.

>

 

It seems very expressionistic.

 

> They are! But you make a good point, they may not be that low.

>

>

>

 

they need haircuts.

 

> That's a very good point. Buttons (James Stewart) is the heart and conscience.

>

 

I really liked Gloria in this movie, too. The scene with the elephant scared me as a kid.

 

> And he didn't direct the film! Orson plays a Turkish colonel. It's an odd role for him. And not that interesting.

>

 

ha, it has that look of a movie that Orson "directed" behind the scenes. only if he really had, it would have been better.

 

> Or he's one heckuva an actor! I've only seen Laurence in two films, so I'm not sure what he's all about, really.

>

 

what you've seen is pretty much his thing. You've seen three movies, haven't you? *The Alamo*, *Darling* and *The Manchurian Candidate*.

[FrankGrimes]

*Lee Marvin.*

 

He's with Brando? Hmmmmm, now that should be interesting.

 

*It seems very expressionistic.*

 

It does have an expressionistic look to it, at times. Your comparing it to Borzage seems apropos, as well.

 

*they need haircuts. *

 

It's the late-60s!

 

*I really liked Gloria in this movie, too.*

 

She's adorable. There's a sweetness to her.

 

*The scene with the elephant scared me as a kid.*

 

Are you talking about when her jealous partner commands the elephant to put pressure on her head?

 

*ha, it has that look of a movie that Orson "directed" behind the scenes. only if he really had, it would have been better.*

 

I'm pretty sure he did direct a lot of it. And you're right, it's too bad it wasn't his film from the start.

 

*what you've seen is pretty much his thing. You've seen three movies, haven't you? The Alamo, Darling and The Manchurian Candidate.*

 

You're right, I've seen three of his films. But Darling isn't one of them. *The Good Die Young* is the other.

[MissGoddess]

> He's with Brando? Hmmmmm, now that should be interesting.

>

 

He's one of the "pack".

 

> It does have an expressionistic look to it, at times. Your comparing it to Borzage seems apropos, as well.

>

 

the storyline sounds like one he would have loved to film.

 

> Are you talking about when her jealous partner commands the elephant to put pressure on her head?

>

 

yes, that's when i started hating lyle bettger, lol.

 

> You're right, I've seen three of his films. But Darling isn't one of them. *The Good Die Young* is the other.

>

 

oh! i thought you'd seen *darling*. larry is very "larry" in it. waspish.

[FrankGrimes]

Bonjour, Bronxie! -- There's a tornado warning for your area? Is everything all right?

 

*Hi, Frank! I love your mini-reviews, they're like candy! You're so succinct and literate, delicious!*

 

Awwww, that was very sweet of you to say. But I must say, I'm far from literate, especially next to you.

 

*A little too much torment for me in THE COUNTRY GIRL; I'm always aware of Bing "acting".*

 

Poor Bing! I thought it fit since he was playing a performer.

 

*I can never get through REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE, (Ditto THE WILD ONE, lol) although I think the scene in the planetarium is excellent.*

 

What holds you back? The entire teen scene?

 

*I'm not a fan of wide-screen David Lean, so things like RYAN'S DAUGHTER (John Mills scares me with that make-up), DR. ZHIVAGO, and LAWRENCE OF ARABIA kind of bore me.*

 

"Wide-screen David Lean." I like that. I ended up liking *Doctor Zhivago*. I've yet to watch *Lawrence of Arabia*. I definitely like the visuals of Lean. I also love how he messes with me with his relationships.

 

*Your description of LE NOTTI BIANCHI sounds like a Russian short story I remember reading years ago. Tolstoy, I think.*

 

Well, you're right. *Le Notti Bianchi* is Fyodor Dostoevsky.

 

*Hardly recall THE BARON OF ARIZONA, but Vincent seemed to be having a field day in that kind of role.*

 

It's his film and he carries it terribly well.

 

*I haven't seen DESPERATE JOURNEY -- is this a WWII tale?*

 

Yes it is. Raymond Massey plays a Nazi.

 

*I get the Hope "My Favorites" mixed up. He did one with Hedy Lamarr, too, if I'm not mistaken.*

 

He did. And I really like *My Favorite Blonde* with Maddy Carroll.

 

*I've seen bits and pieces of CRACK-UP but it didn't stand out for me much, except I believe O'Brien has a scene where he actually shows some real emotion, ha!*

 

You're naughty!

 

*Never saw AS YOUNG AS YOU FEEL but it sounds like some '50's pablum-type stuff, maybe infused with a bit of unexpected cynicism and charm.*

 

It's very 50s' "Fox." It's missing your Max Showalter yucking it up, though.

 

*I get confused with late '30's Warner's rat-a-tat-tat comedy-gangster outings, like BROTHER ORCHID, etc., so I'm wondering if BULLETS OR BALLOTS falls into that same category.*

 

Oh, no, it's a very serious film.

 

 

*I have never been able to sit through any version of THE PRISONER OF ZENDA. I wish someone could tell me why!*

 

That surprises me. I thought you like the Brits. Do you not like Ronald Colman?

 

*Never saw LEGEND OF THE LOST, ditto THE FLAME OF NEW ORLEANS, which sounds like the kind of low budget '40's Dietrich vehicle where she's mainly brawling around a saloon floor with various people, when not knocking out bar tunes. (Rene Clair, vraiment?)*

 

No bar room tunes in this one. Marlene does sing, but it's at a dinner party in her home. This one is a light and fluffy Marlene flick.

 

*I saw VACATION FROM MARRIAGE years ago -- of course I love Robert Donat, but strangely don't really remember this too well.*

 

He's very "Robert Donat" is this one, so I'm surprised you don't remember it. It is a rather unique film.

 

*I'm beginning to appreciate turtle-face Franchot Tone as a very fine actor, and feel he's wasted in THE GIRL FROM MISSOURI.*

 

But he's charming in that one! It's really his film.

 

*I tend to confuse A&C IN THE FOREIGN LEGION with MEET THE MUMMY, because they have similiar scenes in the desert -- one where Lou is having hallucinations amidst the sand and sees a newsboy hawking papers. Lou asks him what he's doing there, and the kid replies: "Can I help it if they gave me a bad corner?"*

 

 

*I've just seen one Rohmer, and that's CLAIRE'S KNEE. Only responded to scenic Lake Annecy, and not the script with that hairy '70's protagonist.*

 

That's the next Rohmer for me to watch. I'm actually looking forward to it.

 

*From the title, MERRILY WE GO TO HELL sounds like one of those be-happy-you're poor mid-Depression era comedy-dramas where everybody is supposed to whoop it up and spend money because that's what life is all about.*

 

That was funny! The film is actually more serious than that. It's about fame and alcoholism. The film actually plays more like *A Star Is Born*.

 

*CASH McCALL had annoyingly cutesy banjo-type music to underscore how ironically "amusing" and apparently corrupt James Garner's character was.*

 

I can't even remember the score! But that usually gets past me.

 

*Re: THE GREATEST SHOW ON EARTH -- clowns have always scared me so circus dramas are not something I gravitate towards.*

 

Clowns scare you? Why?

 

*Frank, I didn't know you were such a fan of tormented love, lol, so I do recommend, if you haven't already seen it, GOODBYE AGAIN. Of course, your enjoyment of this movie will no doubt mainly depend on how you feel about Bergman's "Paula" (she, like Jean Seberg in BONJOUR TRISTESSE, comes full circle....) and whether you can accept her relationship with (miscast) Tony Perkins. All three characters are pretty much hot messes -- tremendously needy and therefore delusional. When I mentioned that GA reminded me of BONJOUR TRISTESSE, I had no idea that Francoise Sagan penned "Aimez-vous Brahms?", the story on which GOODBYE AGAIN is adapted! If one missed the opening credits, it would be easy to assume that GA was directed by Preminger as a companion piece of sorts to BT. There are emotionally misguided protagonists residing in glamourous, elegant settings; veneers of sophistication masking vulnerability and yearning; similiar musical themes; plus a world-weary chanteuse in both, singing bittersweet, cynical odes on the nature of love.*

 

Yes, I have seen *Goodbye, Again*. My issue with the film is yours: Anthony Perkins. He just bothers me in this one. I like his character. I like his dilemma of loving an older, married woman. But he just bothers me. I do like Ingrid Bergman in the film. I like her situation; her loneliness, her feeling rejected. You can see how she'd really go for the adulation and appreciation of Philip (Anthony Perkins). Yves Montand is very good, because I didn't like his character one bit. Ultimately, the film falls short for me. But you are very right about it being a tormented love story, because two characters are left tormented.

[FrankGrimes]

*He's one of the "pack".*

 

I can't picture it! That's going to be rather funny to me.

 

*the storyline sounds like one he would have loved to film.*

 

It does seem like a Borzage kind of story, but I say that having seen only a couple of his films.

 

*yes, that's when i started hating lyle bettger, lol.*

 

Maybe I rate ahead of him!

 

*oh! i thought you'd seen darling. larry is very "larry" in it. waspish.*

 

And you're the star of that one!

[MissGoddess]

> {quote:title=FrankGrimes wrote:}{quote}*He's one of the "pack".*

>

> I can't picture it! That's going to be rather funny to me.

>

 

It is!

 

[FrankGrimes]

Oh my goodness! How ridiculous!

[JackFavell]

What a great cap from The Wild One. Lee's such a hound dog in this one. He's actually very funny.

[JackFavell]

> What's going on with your computer?

 

It's just not working right. It's not a virus, it's just starting to go kaput. I think it's the memory. Every time I get online for a little while, it crashes.

 

> That could be a big reason why it eluded me. I'm usually a sucker for such love stories, but I just didn't have the strong feelings for Charles and Olivia by the end.

 

Awww! I think it still works. I wonder if you'll like Olivia better after you've seen her in more movies. Or not. You liked her in GWTW didn't you?

 

> I loved the character she played, so I should have loved her. Maybe Olivia is a big reason why I couldn't fall for the film. She's very hit or miss with me.

 

She's a rather thoughtful actress, not fiery or mercurial. I always liked her but it's taken me years to realize what a fine actress she is. She has a narrow range, or at least the studio only saw her one way. Perhaps it's that well groomed, modulated voice, calm in a sea of troubles type that doesn't really play for you. Although I'd say lamby is very similar.

 

> I agree. She's scorned, which I love. She reminded me of Carolyn Jones in *A Hole in the Head*. Actually, the film is a little bit similar with some of the characters, namely those played by Charles, Olivia, and Paulette. You could even stretch it to include Walter Abel, who is the disapproving "big brother" in the picture. Anita (Paulette Goddard) wants to keep twisting in the wind, playing the same game with Georges (Charles Boyer). Georges starts to grow up by film's end.

 

I tried to find A Hole in the Head last time, but wasn't able to. I remember it vaguely, I liked it but I can't really bring any specifics to mind. I love Walter Abel.

 

> It's a seedy background for sure. The background is actually similar to that of *A Hole in the Head*.

 

Again, I don't remember it well enough to know. I do remember that Frankie is not doing well.

 

> I guess I felt Georges transformation was rather sudden. I'm going to use the word again, "tormented." I feel the torment with Tony (Frank Sinatra) in *A Hole in the Head*. I didn't feel that with Georges.

 

Interesting. I can see that. I just hope you would give it another chance someday. I've had so many films that I ended up loving that on first showing did nothing for me.

 

 

> *Le Notti Bianche* is a Criterion film, so you should be able to track it down.

 

I just hope I can track it down for free.

 

 

> I didn't know she was in that. *Term of Trial* is the first time I've seen her, I believe. She's excellent in that film. *Ryan's Daughter* ends up being an extension of that film, almost.

That's true. I never really thought of that.

 

> That's very nicely said. I agree. He wasn't looking to belittle and condemn. He was purely looking to remind and warn. He was leaving it up to the individual to make their own conscious decisions. When we're caught in our fits of wrongful behavior, we often look to silence our conscious. Father Collins (Trevor Howard) was the kind wake-up call.

 

I would have been yelling at him! I can't take it when someone is right about my faults or notices my behaviors. But I probably would have gone back at some point and apologized.

 

> Oh, yes, definitely. But the reason they are selfish is usually for a gain I get. Thomas Ryan's (Leo McKern) reasons for blowing in the wind are simply due to cowardice to stand for anything. I usually despise such characters.

 

Yes, I agree, and yet, it started out innocently, he just wanted to be a big man, first to the townspeople, then to the Brits. Some people care what others think of them, and just want everyone to like them. He never thought of the consequences of his actions, just how it reflected on him and his image to anyone who was looking at that moment. He was as ignorant as the others in the town but he wanted to appear as a hero to someone. I think he's such a sad figure. He reminds me of someone else in movies, but I can't bring it to mind.. deluded. Trying to appear as a big man to hide the shame of his fear.

 

> That really was Shakespearean. And I fully expected a worse treatment of Rosy than what she received. I guess it's all about shame.

 

I did too. I was horrified. If she'd been a man, they'd have done worse... which is why her father couldn't speak up. He was all about fear, right from the beginning.Fear of being found out to be less than he wanted to be. It's really self delusion. Imagine how much more fear he had at this point than he had to begin with.

 

> We humans are an insecure bunch that are always seeking the approval of others. Even the most individualistic of people have this in them. It's unavoidable. The other thing humans love is power. Some of us don't even realize we love it because we seek it on smaller levels. But the bullying of the townsfolk is on a larger level. It's far more difficult to face a crowd than join one.

 

 

I understood their jealousy I guess, but man,they were an ugly lot. I despised them far more than poor Ryan. To me he was understandable, but they were just hideous.

 

>By film's end, I got the feeling he was purposely using Michael. But before that, I didn't. It's all about their scenes on the beach. It felt like Doryan and Michael were rather familiar with each other.

 

You are right, they did seem to be familiar... I never thought of that.

 

> That's a great question. The way Doryan comes off is that he's a tin soldier. He's shellshocked and frail. The flashbacks support this. But I have no idea if that's Lean's choice or the actor's ability.

 

No I'm sure that was Lean's choice. We are supposed to see him as a user or as a victim or both at the same time.... But what I meant was the actor's blankness leaves everything unresolved about Doryan. But is that blank a Lean idea? or was he just not a good actor? Did Lean want more from him emotionally? or did he want him somewhat unknowable? I can't tell.

 

 

> That's quite brilliant. I think you're right. Rosy probably does understand Doryan and then her father because it's the same feelings inside of her that led her astray. She probably still loves Charles but Charles doesn't provide for her in the physical and emotional. So what does a person do in such a circumstance? It's one thing to say your mate doesn't like something like gardening. You can find outlets to fill that need, innocent ones. But what if they don't like intimacy and sex? That can be a marital prison that's hard to handle. Physical desires are strong currents to deny. And what's worse is that if you do go astray and experience those feelings, they are hard to move on from, to put aside. You may always find yourself going back to them in your mind. That's where Rosy is now and Charles even brings this up with her.

 

Passion is a scary thing to some people. If you love a person who is not brought up to show it, is that a reason togo elsewhere or stop loving them? Is it inevitable over time? Can they make up for it with tenderness and loyalty? Or a different kind of intimacy, the kind that knows you inside and out, as Charles did by the end of the film?

 

On the other side of things, can Charles ever really know Rosy if she keeps her feelings about sex or passion to herself? Can she come down to earth and simply be in the moment? Can she see him romantically again? She did at the beginning, but it was a schoolgirl crush. He opened her mind, and she thought he was exciting and worldly. I think they have more of a chance together, since now they both know one another more completely. That kind of intimacy means more than sex sometimes. And at least he will try hard to fulfill her, I think he could learn to, once he has the awareness of her as a sexual being, which he does now. And perhaps leaving is the best thing they could do. She needs that stimulus of seeing new things and being in new places. It might be the best thing for him as well, opening his world back up. So I'm hopeful for them at the end of the movie.

 

 

> I did like Bing in this film. The character felt very true. The only thing that didn't ring true to me was the tragedy in the film. It felt forced and unbelievable.

 

How so? Maybe I'm not remembering the entire incident well, but I could see that driving a huge wedge between two people. It seemed pretty realistic to me.

 

> I'll probably be posting my next group of films this weekend. I have two to watch. But for the next group, I'm going to watch *The Wild One*. Then I'll understand what you are referring to.

 

It's got some good stuff and some silly stuff. I wouldn't say its a great movie. It's kind of like watching Easy Rider... it's almost too much of it's time for us to watch it seriously at this point. But I can see how it might have rattled people in the 50's. I can find it laughable and at the same time find great poignancy in it. The girl and Brando have a very nice chemistry. I like the girl. She's a good girl but isn't completely vapid. She understands life.

 

> Now that's an excellent question. I know I'm not qualified to answer it. I'm sure the aftereffects of World War II played a major role in sculpting the American home, particularly in the 50s. What Nicholas Ray tapped into was a disrespect that the youth may have been feeling at the time. The disrespect led to a rebellion of sorts. Was the Cold War also one between parents and children?

 

Absolutely. Kids became far more sophisticated, or perhaps they just got a voice to express what had always been there - dissatisfaction with their parents' choices and lives. I think it grew into the generation gap in the sixties.

 

> Oh, I absolutely love torment. Tormented love is my favorite. I've never experienced love. I've had great feelings of love inside of me, but I've never been able to make them real. So I'm completely tormented, hence my seeking it in film.

 

You're completely tormented on this site anyway.

 

 

> That's deep! What I have loved about Lean is that there is a great deal of emotional honesty and dishonesty found within his primary characters. Take *Brief Encounter*. Laura (Celia Johnson) isn't really looking to have an affair, but she runs into a man who shows her interest. They become friends and the friendship starts to create a feeling of love. These feelings are honest. Laura ends up returning to her husband, so now she has to deal with dishonest feelings. I've seen four other Lean films with the exact same premise, just with slight twists and different "attire."

 

Now that's really good! You are totally right, they are all about honesty and dishonesty.. with one's self and with others. When you and MissG were talking about Ryan's Daughter, someone mentioned how the imaginative dreamers (or deluded types) could create so much danger for themselves and for others around them. It made me think of Man in the White Suit, an Alec Guinness film that I am not sure you've seen. That's the underlying current of the movie. How dangerous is the dreamer to society?

 

 

> If one is lucky, they find all of their feelings, needs, and desires fulfilled by one person. I'd say many people do find this. However, there will always be someone who may do something even better for you than your mate. The trick is not falling in love with another, even though they may be exciting you at that moment or for many moments.

 

I don't know if such a thing is possible. The commitment is the thing in marriage, not the fulfillment of every possible need or desire.It seems that way at first,,,that the need is the biggest part of it.. the lightning bolt.... That's the problem, most people think that it's the romance that is the most important part. I've known plenty of romantics, but the ones who'll stick with you when you are throwing up or giving birth, or burping while you scratch yourself, well that's a rarity. It's nice to get both in the same package - you have to have the lightning, but if that's all there is, well... good luck to you when you are showing all your human weakness and stupidity.

 

> Can we honestly express our feelings to our loved one? We love to hide.

 

I don't know, I tend to hide some parts of my emotional self even with Andrew. If I'm depressed I usually don't say anything. And yet, that's probably when I should talk about it.

 

> Excellent point! You're a dreamer, so I believe you are going to understand the feelings of *Le Notti Bianche*. I think you'll love the setting, too. It's a simple yet stylish presentation.

 

That sounds like me!

 

> I've never really watched much Woody but I'd probably love his work since he's a neurotic who focuses on relationships.

 

Ha! Aren't we all?

 

> Are you afraid I've built it up too much? No worries. You'll love the overall feelings within and message of the film, and you'll adore the camerawork. It screams "you."

 

No, not afraid of that... afraid the darn thing will be cracked or won't play in my machine! I've tried so many times now!

 

> Walsh is off and on with me. I usually don't find much emotion in his films with the exception of the ones I really like, such as *High Sierra*. But this film definitely scored with me. There's some hidden emotion in it, as well.

 

He can be variable, depending on the subject, how much time the studio gave him, and whether it was a personal project or not. He was a jobbing director, so some of his films are just cranked out for the studio. Which ones didn't you like?

 

> In this group of films, this is the film I'd select for Quiet Gal to watch. I think she'd really enjoy it. I think her husband would, too.

 

I totally agree! It's a great adventure story, very much fun with a lot of suspense and banter. It's right up her alley.

 

> I have really liked three of the "Hope" films that I've recently watched. *My Favorite Brunette* and *The Lemon Drop Kid* are two of them. I also enjoyed *The Cat and the Canary*. And I can't say Hope is the main reason, either. He's a big part of those films, but there has been more to it with them. In terms of comedy, I have liked Hope a bit more with the "Road" pictures.

 

I've never seen the Cat and the Canary. I meant I thought it was the best of Hope's films without Bing. The road pics are something completely beyond.

 

> I never really watched Columbo. Are you saying it's a prototype for the show or character?

 

I mean the show. It's a howdunnit, not a whodunnit.

 

> You're right, it really is a menagerie. I'm still blown away by the fact that Ray Milland is the "good guy" and Duke becomes more of a "bad guy." There's a little bit of *The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance* with that.

 

A little, I don't really believe he's that bad. maybe that's the power of Wayne.

 

> I can definitely see how you'd really enjoy this one. Ronald Colman is certainly quite good, here. He's a far different kind of hero than Errol Flynn, though. He's still very enjoyable. The film is a good companion with *A Tale of Two Cities*.

 

I get the feeling you aren't a big Colman fan.

 

> I was hoping for more of Madeleine Carroll, but she wasn't around that much. But I really did enjoy Fairbanks, Jr. and Massey. And the ending is pretty exciting. I like your mentioning Foulger. That's very "you."

 

I love the guys in between. They make or break movies for me.

 

> I never heard of *Le Million*. Is it available on YouTube? I'm guessing *The Flame of New Orleans* is probably lesser than *I Married a Witch*. That's one I've yet to see. I just thought the film was charming. It's a nice change of pace for Marlene. I liked seeing her this way. She's always engaging to me.

 

Yes, Le Million is in parts on youtube:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ge8IEtUkleo

 

Clair is very light, and I think he's always good, so lesser is still not bad. I think he's underrated because he's light.

 

> Of Clair's work, I have also seen *It Happened Tomorrow* and *And Then There Were None*. I like both of those films.

 

I love It Happened Tomorrow. I really enjoyed And Then There Were None.

 

 

> I do believe it's my not falling for the love story as to why I didn't like the film all that much. I didn't find Boyer as alluring and Olivia is a little too sterile for me. It is true, I never felt their romance.

 

She can be cool, but I think there's something underneath. So have you seen The Strawberry Blonde?

 

 

> I thought it was okay. I like Robert Donat when he he's more like "*The 39 Steps*" and not like "Mr. Chips." He was more like the latter, here. I like Deborah Kerr as a mouse, so she played well with me. I did think the story was rather bold for its time. I like how they both fall victim and expect the other to be devastated when told the news. It ends up being a rather sweet story.

 

He's mostly Mr. Chips in the later movies, rarely 39 steps, unfortunately. But he's very good at it. Knight Without Armour is one to see, unless you've already given it a look...I think you already did chat about it some time ago. And it has Marlene, who never fails to interest.

 

> I do agree with the premise of the film, too. I think we create our own situations. We can do something to change our unhappiness if only we attempted to do so. But we always assume our mate is content and will not change. Again, it's about communication and expressing one's thoughts. Having said that, we all get comfortable and it sometimes takes an outside force to disrupt our routines, to save us from ourselves.

 

I think it's kind of funny in retrospect that it took a war to jolt those two out of their stale prim lifestyle,

 

> I actually really enjoyed Franchot Tone. He was doing all he could to win over Jean Harlow. I think it's more his film than Jean's. I also thought Patsy Kelly was fun.

 

I guess I just expected it to be more Jean's movie.

 

 

> So what don't you like about this period of British film? I thought you loved everything British! What I liked about the film is the temptation. It is always flattering for a man to have a woman or even girl want you. *Term of Trial* captures this well. You really have to have a strong commitment to push such temptation away. I still feel Graham (Laurence Olivier) crosses a line in his actions. If a teacher today did what he does, they'd really be done for.

 

Like MissG said, those kitchen sink dramas are so belabored and depressing! It was like they (and some American playwrights and movies) had to take every bit of dirty laundry and air it out in front of us... it's just so ugly and I don't end up caring because the folks don't have any redeeming qualities. It's just sordidness paraded around in black and white like it was art. Of course, there are exceptions to the rule for me.

 

> That's funny! I always expect everyone to hate the film. Ginger is what is off for me. She's trying too hard. I feel for her because she was stuck in that horrible time for actresses of middle age. You make a great point about Reginald Gardiner. Who knew?! I liked the film from the outset. I was loving Peggy Ann Garner.

 

I agree with all you wrote here.

 

 

> No, I haven't. What do you like about it?

 

the 1934 Cleopatra is kitschy and pre-code which is wonderful, but there isalso a real forthright honesty about Claudette's Cleo that I love. She's very sexy, but you can see a real person there. I like that the film is on Cleo's side, totally. It's her film, and I like her. It's not just steamy love scenes.

 

> I agree with that completely. She's trying so darn hard. And what makes her great with Fred? She feels natural. Women want to be like her and men want to be with her.

 

Exactly! So what happened?

 

> I've found classic film as an older guy, so my want to see anything "kiddie" in the classic world is very low. Now if I had grown up with *The Parent Trap*, maybe I would have liked it more. But it really is quite "girly."

 

And that's good.

[CineMaven]

"Passion is a scary thing to some people. If you love a person who is not brought up to show it, is that a reason togo elsewhere or stop loving them? Is it inevitable over time? Can they make up for it with tenderness and loyalty? Or a different kind of intimacy, the kind that knows you inside and out, as Charles did by the end of the film?"

 

You have a thoughtfull forthright way of writing. You come through in it, Jackie. :-)

[JackFavell]

Thanks, Maven! I appreciate that very much. Thank goodness for friends like you who bring out the best in me. If it weren't for you guys and your inspiration and friendship, I wouldn't have ever started writing. I'd still be locked up inside myself, afraid to put down a word.

 

Now you can't shut me up! See what you started?

[MissGoddess]

i meant to add that i felt the same as you about black widow...i wanted to like it more, but ginger really sunk it---i just couldn't bear her character. i have mentioned before that her post-30s work is often irritating to me. I saw the Dennis Morgan movie you mentioned, and I also wanted it to be better than it ended up. *Tight Spot* is one of the few where I thought she was okay.

[JamesJazGuitar]

I believe we have discussed Roger's post 30's work and agree there, but your comment related to Black Widow caught my attention; 'i just couldn't bear her character'.

 

As you know the part was written as unlikable character. So what other actress would you have wanted to play that part? I can think of Shelly Winters. She was great playing an unlikable character and she would of been able to do it in a more natural way.

 

 

[MissGoddess]

good question...i'm not sure, but someone with shelly's kind of self-aware humor might have made it more endurable. at least shelly had less hauteur.

[FrankGrimes]

You were on quite late the other night, Denver!

 

*It's just not working right. It's not a virus, it's just starting to go kaput. I think it's the memory. Every time I get online for a little while, it crashes.*

 

That's a shame. So it's about how long you spend on-line? You're burning it up!

 

 

*Awww! I think it still works. I wonder if you'll like Olivia better after you've seen her in more movies. Or not. :DYou liked her in GWTW didn't you?*

 

 

I do like her "Melanie." She's calm, caring, and considerate. What I've seen of Olivia:

 

 

1. Hush... Hush, Sweet Charlotte

2. Lady in a Cage

3. Gone with the Wind

4. Light in the Piazza

5. The Adventures of Robin Hood

6. The Proud Rebel

7. The Heiress

8. The Snake Pit

9. Hold Back the Dawn

10. Captain Blood

11. The Male Animal

12. Not as a Stranger

13. My Cousin Rachel

14. The Dark Mirror

 

 

I guess I like her older.

 

 

*She's a rather thoughtful actress, not fiery or mercurial. I always liked her but it's taken me years to realize what a fine actress she is. She has a narrow range, or at least the studio only saw her one way. Perhaps it's that well groomed, modulated voice, calm in a sea of troubles type that doesn't really play for you. Although I'd say lamby is very similar.*

 

 

She is a little similar to Grace. I guess the difference is I've seen Grace being playful. I also love when Grace pouts. Olivia may be too reserved for me. I don't find her to be too accessible. My two favorite films of hers feature her being devilish and being tortured.

 

 

*I tried to find A Hole in the Head last time, but wasn't able to. I remember it vaguely, I liked it but I can't really bring any specifics to mind. I love Walter Abel.*

 

 

Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you were familiar with the film.

 

 

*Again, I don't remember it well enough to know. I do remember that Frankie is not doing well.*

 

 

Frank owns a hotel but he's about to be shut down because he owes money. A good portion of the film takes place in his hotel.

 

 

*Interesting. I can see that. I just hope you would give it another chance someday. I've had so many films that I ended up loving that on first showing did nothing for me.*

 

 

I'm sure that's possible. You know how I am, it depends on who I'm around. If someone wants to watch it or is discussing the film, I'd revisit it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*I just hope I can track it down for free. *

 

 

Do you pay for a movie service such as Netflix?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*I would have been yelling at him! I can't take it when someone is right about my faults or notices my behaviors. But I probably would have gone back at some point and apologized.*

 

 

Definitely. But you'd love and respect him, so I think you'd come to appreciate his concern for you.

 

 

*Yes, I agree, and yet, it started out innocently, he just wanted to be a big man, first to the townspeople, then to the Brits. Some people care what others think of them, and just want everyone to like them. He never thought of the consequences of his actions, just how it reflected on him and his image to anyone who was looking at that moment. He was as ignorant as the others in the town but he wanted to appear as a hero to someone. I think he's such a sad figure. He reminds me of someone else in movies, but I can't bring it to mind.. deluded. Trying to appear as a big man to hide the shame of his fear.*

 

 

I call such people "chameleons." They are always changing for the approval of another. They never have their own colors. Whoever is winning, that's who they are for.

 

 

*I did too. I was horrified. If she'd been a man, they'd have done worse... which is why her father couldn't speak up. He was all about fear, right from the beginning.Fear of being found out to be less than he wanted to be. It's really self delusion. Imagine how much more fear he had at this point than he had to begin with.*

 

 

Cowardice comes from fear. It would be very difficult to stand up to an angry mob and say you were the guilty one. But when it's your own daughter, you'd think you'd do it even if it wasn't you. There's no doubting that he was a tragic figure, a creation of his own.

 

 

*I understood their jealousy I guess, but man,they were an ugly lot. I despised them far more than poor Ryan. To me he was understandable, but they were just hideous.*

 

 

The bully mob was a horrible, cruel lot. They were ugly humans. Rosy's father wasn't a cruel person. He was just a weak one.

 

 

*No I'm sure that was Lean's choice. We are supposed to see him as a user or as a victim or both at the same time.... But what I meant was the actor's blankness leaves everything unresolved about Doryan. But is that blank a Lean idea? or was he just not a good actor? Did Lean want more from him emotionally? or did he want him somewhat unknowable? I can't tell.*

 

 

All good questions. I'm certainly not sure. I do like Doryan as emotionless. He's warm with the physical but cold with the emotional. He's terribly damaged.

 

 

*Passion is a scary thing to some people. If you love a person who is not brought up to show it, is that a reason togo elsewhere or stop loving them? Is it inevitable over time? Can they make up for it with tenderness and loyalty? Or a different kind of intimacy, the kind that knows you inside and out, as Charles did by the end of the film?*

 

 

That's always up to the individual. Can a person change what brings them happiness in life? Can Rosy take initiative with Charles, almost teaching him to love her in a way she desires? All of that takes time and effort. And none of it may feel natural.

 

 

*On the other side of things, can Charles ever really know Rosy if she keeps her feelings about sex or passion to herself? Can she come down to earth and simply be in the moment? Can she see him romantically again? She did at the beginning, but it was a schoolgirl crush. He opened her mind, and she thought he was exciting and worldly. I think they have more of a chance together, since now they both know one another more completely. That kind of intimacy means more than sex sometimes. And at least he will try hard to fulfill her, I think he could learn to, once he has the awareness of her as a sexual being, which he does now. And perhaps leaving is the best thing they could do. She needs that stimulus of seeing new things and being in new places. It might be the best thing for him as well, opening his world back up. So I'm hopeful for them at the end of the movie.*

 

 

I'd say a child would bring them together. That would be the next step for Rosy as a woman after having a schoolgirl crush and then a passionate affair. Without a child, I think Rosy would remain restless and in search of stimulation. She could share her feelings and desires with Charles, but that takes courage.

 

 

*How so? Maybe I'm not remembering the entire incident well, but I could see that driving a huge wedge between two people. It seemed pretty realistic to me.*

 

 

THE COUNTRY GIRL IS SPOILED

 

 

I didn't like that their son just wandered away from Frank and then was killed. It didn't feel natural. It seemed like a dramatic plot device and only that.

 

 

*It's got some good stuff and some silly stuff. I wouldn't say its a great movie. It's kind of like watching Easy Rider... it's almost too much of it's time for us to watch it seriously at this point. But I can see how it might have rattled people in the 50's. I can find it laughable and at the same time find great poignancy in it. The girl and Brando have a very nice chemistry. I like the girl. She's a good girl but isn't completely vapid. She understands life.*

 

 

You and Miss G have set me up for this one. I'm expecting some craziness.

 

 

*Absolutely. Kids became far more sophisticated, or perhaps they just got a voice to express what had always been there - dissatisfaction with their parents' choices and lives. I think it grew into the generation gap in the sixties.*

 

 

I think pop culture played a big difference with the generation gap, even in the 50s. Pop culture seemingly took off in the 50s. Television is arguably the greatest reason why.

 

 

*You're completely tormented on this site anyway. *

 

 

That's for sure! And I'm the sweet and innocent one!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Now that's really good! You are totally right, they are all about honesty and dishonesty.. with one's self and with others. When you and MissG were talking about Ryan's Daughter, someone mentioned how the imaginative dreamers (or deluded types) could create so much danger for themselves and for others around them. It made me think of Man in the White Suit, an Alec Guinness film that I am not sure you've seen. That's the underlying current of the movie. How dangerous is the dreamer to society?*

 

 

You are correct, I haven't seen that one. And I do believe dreamers do create problems for themselves and then others. Those who need adventure tend to be restless.

 

 

*I don't know if such a thing is possible. The commitment is the thing in marriage, not the fulfillment of every possible need or desire.It seems that way at first,,,that the need is the biggest part of it.. the lightning bolt.... That's the problem, most people think that it's the romance that is the most important part. I've known plenty of romantics, but the ones who'll stick with you when you are throwing up or giving birth, or burping while you scratch yourself, well that's a rarity. :DIt's nice to get both in the same package - you have to have the lightning, but if that's all there is, well... good luck to you when you are showing all your human weakness and stupidity.*

 

 

And that would be Charles and not Doryan. Doryan would be the needy one in a relationship. He would be moody and unpredictable. Charles is one speed and completely predictable. Both are flawed men, but Charles is going to be the more reliable one.

 

 

So do you understand Rosy's actions? How would you approach her situation if you were in her shoes?

 

 

*I don't know, I tend to hide some parts of my emotional self even with Andrew. If I'm depressed I usually don't say anything. And yet, that's probably when I should talk about it.*

 

 

I think most people are that way. Lots and lots of hiding. I only show myself when I'm really hurting. I'm a firm believer in talking things out. I believe in the release. But there are two parts to that equation. The other side is who you open up to. Do they care about you and what you are saying? For example, my country grandma is a poor sounding board. She's quick to say, "things will work out." That leaves me empty. Some people just cannot handle the problems of another, so they quickly push them away with "scripted" words. I need some depth.

 

 

*No, not afraid of that... afraid the darn thing will be cracked or won't play in my machine! I've tried so many times now!*

 

 

Oh!

 

 

*He can be variable, depending on the subject, how much time the studio gave him, and whether it was a personal project or not. He was a jobbing director, so some of his films are just cranked out for the studio. Which ones didn't you like?*

 

 

What I've seen of Walsh:

 

 

1. High Sierra

2. The Roaring Twenties

3. Desperate Journey

4. White Heat

5. Big Brown Eyes

6. Colorado Territory

7. The Big Trail

8. Northern Pursuit

9. Pursued

10. They Drive by Night

11. The Tall Men

12. The King and Four Queens

13. Me and My Gal

14. Dark Command

 

 

The top two films are full of great emotion. I feel the emotion isn't nearly as strong in the rest of the films. But Walsh really is about adventure.

 

 

*I mean the show. It's a howdunnit, not a whodunnit.*

 

 

Columbo is more of a "howdunnit"? That's great!

 

 

*A little, I don't really believe he's that bad. maybe that's the power of Wayne. *

 

 

Oh, I don't think he's a bad man, but he's angry and looking to ruin Stephen (John Wayne) because he's lost his girl to him. That's what reminded me of *The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance*. That's how Doniphon starts out with Ranse.

 

 

*I get the feeling you aren't a big Colman fan.*

 

 

I think he's all right. But he's not my kind of leading man, no. I like him best in *The Talk of the Town*.

 

 

*I love the guys in between. They make or break movies for me.*

 

 

They usually provide the humor and heart.

 

 

*Yes, Le Million is in parts on youtube:*

 

 

Terrific! I'll watch it for the next group.

 

 

*Clair is very light, and I think he's always good, so lesser is still not bad. I think he's underrated because he's light.*

 

 

I agree with you. Light is rarely revered and Clair does light exceptionally well.

 

 

*I love It Happened Tomorrow. I really enjoyed And Then There Were None.*

 

 

And I'd reverse the feelings for those two films. But I do like them both.

 

 

*She can be cool, but I think there's something underneath. So have you seen The Strawberry Blonde? *

 

 

Ooops! I forgot to reply to that. No, I haven't seen *The Strawberry Blonde*. I'll check it out. It has Rita! I like your usage of the word "sincere" with Olivia.

 

 

*He's mostly Mr. Chips in the later movies, rarely 39 steps, unfortunately. But he's very good at it. Knight Without Armour is one to see, unless you've already given it a look...I think you already did chat about it some time ago. And it has Marlene, who never fails to interest.*

 

 

I did like Robert Donat and Marlene Dietrich in *Knight Without Armour*. And you're right, Robert is more fun in that one. The film fell short for me, though. Again, I'm not sure why since it's the kind of love story I like.

 

 

*I think it's kind of funny in retrospect that it took a war to jolt those two out of their stale prim lifestyle,*

 

 

Sometimes it takes a war!

 

 

*Like MissG said, those kitchen sink dramas are so belabored and depressing! It was like they (and some American playwrights and movies) had to take every bit of dirty laundry and air it out in front of us... it's just so ugly and I don't end up caring because the folks don't have any redeeming qualities. It's just sordidness paraded around in black and white like it was art. Of course, there are exceptions to the rule for me.*

 

 

That made me laugh! I completely understand your feelings. Who wants to be drained? But I do like some "kitchen sink." Usually the American kind. I didn't go for *Term of Trial*, though.

 

 

*the 1934 Cleopatra is kitschy and pre-code which is wonderful, but there isalso a real forthright honesty about Claudette's Cleo that I love. She's very sexy, but you can see a real person there. I like that the film is on Cleo's side, totally. It's her film, and I like her. It's not just steamy love scenes.*

 

 

But I just want steamy love scenes!

 

 

*I agree with that completely. She's trying so darn hard. And what makes her great with Fred? She feels natural. Women want to be like her and men want to be with her.*

 

 

*Exactly! So what happened?*

 

 

Probably Father Time. I think Ginger was more relaxed and comfortable when she was younger.

 

 

*I've found classic film as an older guy, so my want to see anything "kiddie" in the classic world is very low. Now if I had grown up with The Parent Trap, maybe I would have liked it more. But it really is quite "girly."*

 

 

*And that's good.*

 

 

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

[FrankGrimes]

*i meant to add that i felt the same as you about black widow...i wanted to like it more, but ginger really sunk it---i just couldn't bear her character. i have mentioned before that her post-30s work is often irritating to me.*

 

She was really pushing it in *Black Widow*. She's playing Bette Davis' "Margo" with too much gusto. It became a carricature.

 

*I saw the Dennis Morgan movie you mentioned, and I also wanted it to be better than it ended up.*

 

I liked Ginger in *Perfect Strangers*. I thought she was quite good. The film just didn't come together. I don't like Ginger in *Monkey Business* and *We're Not Married!*.

 

*Tight Spot is one of the few where I thought she was okay.*

 

I haven't seen that one, yet.

[FrankGrimes]

Hi, Movieman -- *THe Bride and I recently saw "Rebel Without A Cause" on the big screen. You are correct that it is about teen angst and friendship but it is even more than that. I'd say relationships.*

 

Yes, I agree with that. Particularly the relationship between parent and child, namely during the teen years.

 

*Part of the angst comes from the main characters relationships with their parents. Dean wants his father to be a father and that means a man. He doesn't see that in him. Wood's father still wants that little girl/ daddy relationship with her father. He is clearly uncomfortable with that now that she is closer to woman the girl, physically at least. Poor Sal Mineo doesnn't have a relationship with either parent. He only has one with the housekeeper.*

 

All of that is correct. They are seeking strength and comfort from a parent and it's not there. The parents are having issues that are leading to developmental issues with their children.

 

*These things may help drive them to each other. After the awkwardness of getting to know each other they find comfort with each other. I think Dean is willing to take a chance on Mineo's friendship. It helps but it only goes so far.*

 

Jim (James Dean) is the strongest of the three. He's a really good kid. His issues are due to his always being the "new kid," since his parents always look to move out of town at the drop of conflict. He just wants to find some friends.

 

Judy (Natalie Wood) is seeking male attention since her father doesn't give her that anymore. Her anger at her father is pushing her to the bad guys, too.

 

And Poor Plato (Sal Mineo) is simply looking for a parent. He finds this with Jim. His reactions at the end of the film are due to his feeling abandoned by Jim and Judy. That's what his parents have done to him.

 

*There have probably been lots of copy cat films since but it is worth remembering this may have been the first like it. I don't quite remember where "The Blackboard Jungle" falls in with it but that is more about Glenn Ford than the kids.*

 

I'm gonna have to check out *The Blackboard Jungle* to see how it compares to *Rebel Without a Cause*.