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

Title of a film I can't remember, here goes


Emily Katherine
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hey, everyone! I recently watched a movie about a week or so ago, but I can't remember what the title is. It's a black and white film, and the ending took place on New Year's Eve of 1899, going into 1900. There was a couple, and the man had been sent to prison for three years for a reason I can't remember. The woman was waiting for him on a bench at the end of the film. Sorry if its obscure and vague, but it's what I got. Many thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Emily Katherine said:

Hey, everyone! I recently watched a movie about a week or so ago, but I can't remember what the title is. It's a black and white film, and the ending took place on New Year's Eve of 1899, going into 1900. There was a couple, and the man had been sent to prison for three years for a reason I can't remember. The woman was waiting for him on a bench at the end of the film. Sorry if its obscure and vague, but it's what I got. Many thanks!

Did it air on TCM?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you sure that how it ends, because the only movie  I remember recently  with somebody getting out of jail and a bench was strawberry blonde , but it didn't end like that I don't remember what time of the year it was. Another possibility was The Sisters with Bette Davis  but the husband wasn't in jail but the ending takes place at a  ball.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Marysara1 said:

Are you sure that how it ends, because the only movie  I remember recently  with somebody getting out of jail and a bench was strawberry blonde , but it didn't end like that I don't remember what time of the year it was. Another possibility was The Sisters with Bette Davis  but the husband wasn't in jail but the ending takes place at a  ball.

I was going to mention the two films,  The Strawberry Blonde and The Sisters as being possible choices but didn't for the reasons you give.    But they are two very sound possible choices (e.g. both are turn of the century films, both have the husband returning after being away a while,  etc...).

I wonder if this is a case of someone confusing two different films.    I.e. one remembers parts of one film and parts of another film and sort of combines them in their mind.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Zea said:

Emily, do you recall anything about the couple? Could you identify them? What they looked like?

I know this image isn't during a snowy evening but does it at all look like the couple?

images.jpeg.74ce90de81e17761757fe99ed95291d1.jpeg

Gary Cooper & Francis Fuller "One Sunday  Afternoon" 1933

 

 

Note that with One Sunday Afternoon and The Strawberry Blonde this is another case where a later adaptation (what some call remake),  is better than the first adaptation.   The 3rd adaptation,  again directed by Walsh in 1948 as One Sunday Afternoon,  but as a musical, with Dennis Morgan,  is the least successful one.

The point being Wallis and Walsh liked the original source material so much they made 2 adaptations within 10 years (but of course 'changed it up' by making it a musical another fairly common device by studios).

   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Note that with One Sunday Afternoon and The Strawberry Blonde this is another case where a later adaptation (what some call remake),  is better than the first adaptation.   The 3rd adaptation,  again directed by Walsh in 1948 as One Sunday Afternoon,  but as a musical, with Dennis Morgan,  is the least successful one.

The point being Wallis and Walsh liked the original source material so much they made 2 adaptations within 10 years (but of course 'changed it up' by making it a musical another fairly common device by studios).   

I don't think everyone agrees the second one is the best version. Cagney fans do, sure...but not everyone.

I haven't seen the 1948 version. But of the two I've seen, I prefer the one with Cooper. I think it's a lot grittier, because there is no production code enforcement. So the killing that occurs feels more shocking (and memorable).

In a similar way I prefer the 1929 version of THE LETTER over the 1940 do-over. Just because a title is more well known because it has big name Warner Brothers stars in it does not necessarily mean everyone thinks it's the best version. Just saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TopBilled said:

I don't think everyone agrees the second one is the best version. Cagney fans do, sure...but not everyone.

I haven't seen the 1948 version. But of the two I've seen, I prefer the one with Cooper. I think it's a lot grittier, because there is no production code enforcement. So the killing that occurs feels more shocking (and memorable).

In a similar way I prefer the 1929 version of THE LETTER over the 1940 do-over. Just because a title is more well known because it has big name Warner Brothers stars in it does not necessarily mean everyone thinks it's the best version. Just saying.

The main reason I like the 1941 version is because of Olivia DeHavilland's performance.   But a lot of that is historical for me;  this was one of the first non violence Warner Bros films I had seen when first getting into studio-era movies; I started out on those WB Cagney and Bogart gangster films and Bogie hero films.     So one day I stumble upon The Strawberry Blonde on late night T.V. and Olivia stole my heart.  The following weekend I went to Hollywood to the Larry Edmund Bookshop (I believe the largest such 'old movie' bookstore there was), and purchased The Films of Olivia DeHavilland.    I was had.

The Cooper version is grittier being a pre-code.    I guess my overall point was that this is a case where two adaptations are solid and that one shouldn't just dismiss later versions because they are called 'remakes'.   Good source material is,  well,  good source material.   

In fact for those that love Dennis Morgan and musicals,  I could see them saying that film is their favorite.     

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

The main reason I like the 1941 version is because of Olivia DeHavilland's performance.   But a lot of that is historical for me;  this was one of the first non violence Warner Bros films I had seen when first getting into studio-era movies; I started out on those WB Cagney and Bogart gangster films and Bogie hero films.     So one day I stumble upon The Strawberry Blonde on late night T.V. and Olivia stole my heart.  The following weekend I went to Hollywood to the Larry Edmund Bookshop (I believe the largest such 'old movie' bookstore there was), and purchased The Films of Olivia DeHavilland.    I was had.

The Cooper version is grittier being a pre-code.    I guess my overall point was that this is a case where two adaptations are solid and that one shouldn't just dismiss later versions because they are called 'remakes'.   Good source material is,  well,  good source material.   

In fact for those that love Dennis Morgan and musicals,  I could see them saying that film is their favorite.     

I'm eager to take a look at the 1948 version because I want to see how far the material evolves from its gritty precode treatment to a light and fluffy Technicolor entertainment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, TopBilled said:

I'm eager to take a look at the 1948 version because I want to see how far the material evolves from its gritty pre-code treatment to a light and fluffy Technicolor entertainment. 

Well you already have a solid understanding of how studios evolved during from the pre-codes to the pre-WWII era, to the WWII and post WWII film 'eras' since you nailed it with 'light and fluffy Technicolor entertainment'.   BUT as we have discussed 'light and fluffy' doesn't mean a film can't be very entertaining.   It is just another style and sometimes I'm in the mood for that (say verses a hard-boiled noir).  

Also I just read your comments about MGM and Paramount and how others are over generalizing.  Yea, studios had tendencies but as you articulated they are NOT as 'fixed' as people claim.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, TopBilled said:

In a similar way I prefer the 1929 version of THE LETTER over the 1940 do-over. Just because a title is more well known because it has big name Warner Brothers stars in it does not necessarily mean everyone thinks it's the best version. Just saying.

As much as my favoritism for Bette Davis is immeasurable, I agree that the 1940 version - and, yes, even her performance in "The Letter" was no comparison to the superior '29 version and especially to Jeanne Eagels' performance.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/23/2018 at 9:05 PM, Zea said:

As much as my favoritism for Bette Davis is immeasurable, I agree that the 1940 version - and, yes, even her performance in "The Letter" was no comparison to the superior '29 version and especially to Jeanne Eagels' performance.

I wonder if Davis was obsessed with topping Eagels' work...because she also appeared in a remake (DECEPTION) of the only other sound film Eagels did (JEALOUSY).

It's almost laughable that Kim Novak thought she could capture Eagels in a later biopic. Eagels had more talent in her left eyelid than Novak did in her entire body. I wonder if Davis wanted to do the biopic, of course she might have been too old for the role by that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

© 2023 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...