RAMBLES Part II

[Bronxgirl48]

Jackie and Miss Goddess, I...am...beside myself. Missed THE STUDENT PRINCE IN OLD HEIDELBERG because I forgot it was on. How could I have been so addle-pated??

As a Lubitsch fan, and someone beginning to appreciate Ramon Navarro, I'm just crushed. The movie sounds so exquisite.

[JackFavell]

Oh, I was just going to apologize for posting about it, because I just now read that Frank is going to watch it this week. I hope I didn't spoil it.

 

I thought Ramon Novarro was just great. He's sensitive and boyish, and can really give you the feeling that he is seeing things for the very first time, all innocence. Jean Hersholt is in it as well, and he's marvelous, just perfection as Dr. Juttner, the prince's only friend and his tutor.

[Bronxgirl48]

Your equally exquisite review doesn't spoil anything -- it just makes me salivate! I'm hoping TCM runs it again -- maybe in February? (Navarro's birth month)

 

From the sublime to the, well...did anyone catch BELLE STARR in its entirety? I started watching but a friend came by and so that was that. Gene is one of my favorite actresses, but she seemed to be auditioning for a GONE WITH THE WIND sequel, lol. Louise Beavers, too, ha! Was this the first pairing of "Laura" and "Mark"? I thought Dana quite handsome. The score sounded very John Ford-ish.

 

Edited by: Bronxgirl48 on Jan 4, 2012 1:29 PM

[JackFavell]

I hope they run it again soon, too! I have a copy, but I can't play it on the computer or take any screencaps from it.

 

I didn't see any of *Belle Starr* but the end, which was quite good, but it didn't have Gene in it. The color was glorious. There was some kind of switch up going on that both Dana and Randolph were in on, even though they were adversaries, but I don't know what it meant.

 

I think I read that Gene always felt she didn't know what she was doing in this picture - she took one look at herself and went out to find out how to act. I may be mixing it up with another of her movies though.

 

I did record it, so I guess I'll find out if I like it or not. Dana was gorgeous and compelling in the end scene. Randolph Scott (cue chorus) was as heartfelt as I've ever seen him. I hope they were both as good through the rest of the picture.

 

Edited by: JackFavell on Jan 4, 2012 2:04 PM

[MissGoddess]

Jackie that was the most exquisite review of *The Student Prince in Old Heidelberg*...you caught so many wonderful details and found their meaning that I would have to watch a couple more times to notice. I did notice the hats but I didn't pull it all together with all their collective meaning...excellent! And the hand-on-heart gestures...wow! I missed so many details yet it still struck me so forcibly. I still can't get over how poignant this movie was...and as you brilliantly say, it's done with such a lightness of touch. This somehow makes the overbearing environment that has Karl Heinrich imprisoned all the more imposing. Lubitsch shows humanity and youth coping and struggling to stay in the sunlight in that ponderous world, straight-jacketed by tradition and "duty". This is truly an "old world" story. I kept thinking it's no wonder the United States was able to climb up on its hind legs and take over so quickly...it was completely unburdened by history and tradition like Europe. Lubitsch knows people, knows history, so well. In a way, his manner of showing the sacrifice and cost of tradition is the old world version of how Ford would show it costing, eventually, those in America, particularly military leaders.

 

That final, devasting shot, the public only sees the legend: "how great it must be to be King" but Lubitsch imprints the human facts on our hearts.

[JackFavell]

Oh my, you are so right! That was exquisitely put as well -

 

to stay in the sunlight

 

He shows the big picture, but just like Ford, he finds the small in it - the real human emotion, and how real people would react. I felt so for them. They were like flowers growing in the shadow of a large tree that would soon take up all the light and nourishment from them.

 

And in the end, it's no wonder that those hide-bound traditions and old men were overthrown, they became like death, dusty, powdery, brittle, cold. One hopes that Karl Heinrich won't turn that direction, but....

 

Edited by: JackFavell on Jan 4, 2012 2:35 PM

[MissGoddess]

STUDENT PRINCE SPOILERS

 

Wasn't it heartbreaking when the prince returned to Heidelberg, thinking he was going to be able to recapture for just one day all the old times, and even the Saxonians had changed toward him (now that he was King)? All the life was drained, literally, out of the inn and the memories. Only Kathi's love still survived.

 

I also love that Lubitsch did NOT show us Karl's bride in the carriage. That was great...a lesser director would have.

 

It's hard to think of a moment that isn't heartbreaking.

 

I loved Dr. Juttner, by the way. I was SO glad when he turned up after the nurse was sent away. That poor wee lad, that was my first time the floodgates burst.

 

Oh! And in that marvelous parade in the opening scenes that you described where all the hats are being waved...and you see the ONLY people who greet Karl Heinrich with any individuality and real joy that doesn't have to do with his status are the young children. And it's the first time Karl smiles and looks happy. Little does he know he won't be allowed to play with them.

[MissGoddess]

I've seen *Belle Starr* before...Gene was definitely miscast and still in what she called her "Minnie Mouse" stage with the squeaky voice. She's awfully cute but a believable Belle Starr, nooooo... Dana is incredibly handsome.

 

And yes, the music is "Fordian" alright, the piece they use is Alfred Newman's Ann Rutledge theme recycled from 1939's *Young Mr. Lincoln*.

[JackFavell]

STUDENT PRINCE SPOILERS

 

>Wasn't it heartbreaking when the prince returned to Heidelberg, thinking he was going to be able to recapture for just one day all the old times, and even the Saxonians had changed toward him (now that he was King)? All the life was drained, literally, out of the inn and the memories. Only Kathi's love still survived.

 

This to me was what was great about the film, though I wanted it not to be the case. You really can't go home again.

 

At first, I was horrified that the town had changed, and that the Saxonians were different, the hill was different...and now he must be deferred to since he was king....I wanted him to have that time in a free environment so badly! But then my mind started to play tricks on me. I started to think that maybe the town was never the way he originally saw it, through that veil of newness, and bright joy at being in the world for the first time, and in love. Maybe the town was never as beautiful as it was to him during those first tentative steps into the real world.

 

But I guess I still think that it all changed, that the taint of his power (which he never exerted or even wanted) finally over-rode the comaraderie of his friends. He would never again be comfortable with anyone, they would all be yes men. But I keep clinging to the thought that he still had old Kellerman back at the palace!

 

>I also love that Lubitsch did NOT show us Karl's bride in the carriage. That was great...a lesser director would have.

 

I think that was brilliant. A reaction shot from her might have destroyed the moment. It certainly wasn't needed. He closes in on Karl's face. It's all about the eyes, as Tag says.

 

>It's hard to think of a moment that isn't heartbreaking.

 

I'll say.

 

>I loved Dr. Juttner, by the way. I was SO glad when he turned up after the nurse was sent away. That poor wee lad, that was my first time the floodgates burst.

 

Me too. He was so kind and knew exactly what the boy needed. I love the way he stopped him from doing the little head bow and handshake. Those little head bows also continue with different meanings all the way through the movie. Then Juttner just envelops him in his big arms protectively and walks him over to get the ball and they just have fun.

 

>Oh! And in that marvelous parade in the opening scenes that you described where all the hats are being waved...and you see the ONLY people who greet Karl Heinrich with any individuality and real joy that doesn't have to do with his status are the young children. And it's the first time Karl smiles and looks happy. Little does he know he won't be allowed to play with them.

 

I LOVED that reaction, first the boys', and then Karl Heinrich's! He was so cute waving to them and excited! You'd think they would want him to inspire the boys, to connect with them, but the old men don't see that. They only see the rules.

 

Edited by: JackFavell on Jan 4, 2012 3:01 PM

[CineMaven]

Oh boy...what am I letting myself in for now? Based on you guys:

: I finally saw "MR. LUCKY"

: I watched "...MADAME DE..."

: I YouTubed "PHENIX CITY STORY" last nite

: I went on a journey with a "WAGON MASTER" and a coupla Ramblers

: I viewed "ROPE OF SAND"

 

...And I just Amazoned the Heidelberg Prince to be delivered this Friday. Either I'm just a groupie trying to see what makes you all tick or I'm getting a well-rounded film education. Well...what won't kill me should make me stronger...and smarter.

 

Here goes.....

 

I have a feeling I won't be in Kansas anymore.

[JackFavell]

I'm so glad! I really hope you like it. I didn't think it was out on dvd....

[MissGoddess]

A SPOILER IN OLD HEIDELBERG

 

> At first, I was horrified that the town had changed, and that the Saxonians were different, the hill was different...and now he must be deferred to since he was king....I wanted him to have that time in a free environment so badly! But then my mind started to play tricks on me. I started to think that maybe the town was never the way he originally saw it, through that veil of newness, and bright joy at being in the world for the first time, and in love. Maybe the town was never as beautiful as it was to him during those first tentative steps into the real world.

>

 

I never thought of it that way! You could be right! Or maybe it is what Lubistch was going for, a momentary befuddlement of our senses...did it all really exist before? Or was I (Karl, the audience) only dreaming? Sometimes memories are like dreams. In fact, once an experience passes into memory, I guess it is the same as a dream, it is an idea that sparks emotion and longing.

 

> But I guess I still think that it all changed, that the taint of his power (which he never exerted or even wanted) finally over-rode the comaraderie of his friends. He would never again be comfortable with anyone, they would all be yes men. But I keep clinging to the thought that he still had old Kellerman back at the palace!

>

 

Bless old Kellerman! I was so happy when he turned up, just as you say, some good "angel" always turned up just when Karl H. needed them most.

 

The way Lubitsch weaves the ironies...here is a boy grown into a man who never really got to be a boy ("Stay young, Karl Heinrich!" urged Dr. Juttner) and when he finally gets to experience some joy and freedom, he is right away snatched backward into the old, staid, dead world of tradition. Then he tries to go back but the past is dead. Irony of ironies that being trapped by a world that is living in the past he tries to escape by going back into the past.

 

> I LOVED that reaction, first the boys', and then Karl Heinrich's! He was so cute waving to them and excited! You'd think they would want him to inspire the boys, to connect with them, but the old men don't see that. They only see the rules.

>

 

That's right, they see his "function" not him. When his train arrives in the beginning, I was expecting a young man...again, what a great intro. Lubitsch shows all this pomp and circumstance and what steps out...a tiny, delicate looking little innocent child. What a contrast!! It's really monstrous to think this receptive little creature is to be molded into an automaton, a functionary of noblesse oblige.

[MissGoddess]

lol! T, I don't know why I resisted watching this movie ever since it was restored and has since appeared a couple of times on TCM (and on DVD). After all, Lubitsch is my second favorite director and this is one of his most famous, if not the most famous of his silent films. It may have been the stars (I've nothing against them, they just aren't favorites) or the setting (yet he's made so many movies in this world) or the plot just didn't sound like anything that thrilling. But I should have trusted the director. I don't normally associate such affecting emotional poignancy with Lubitsch and I'd have missed a very, very special work in his cannon if I'd continued to ignore *The Student Prince*.

 

I still don't know if you'll really like this kind of story and emotions, but as a true blue CineMaven, it can't hurt to watch a true silent classic made by a master.

 

I might add Carl Davis' score was really lovely, too...perfectly in tune with the emotions in the scenes.

 

Seems we all have been stepping afar from our usual trails: Jackie with *Lover Come Back*, you with *Wagon Master* and me with *The Phenix City Story*. Whew, what is this place coming to?

[MissGoddess]

Forgive me for jumping around so much, but Jackie did you catch "Bitter Waters", the John Brahm Screen Directors Playhouse that just aired...with our Georgie? It was really good! It was based on a Henry James story, "Louisa Pallant", that I'm sure I must have read back in my HJ phase but have no recollection. What surprised me was seeing George play such a decent, honorable fellow, ha! And Robert Vaughn is a good choice to play his nephew. I always thought Vaughn had a slight hauteur to his manner, which makes him an ideal relation of Sanders.

 

I wish I had recorded this one. They sneak these DPH episodes in and of course I don't bother to look over the schedule.

[JackFavell]

OLD HEIDELSPOILED

 

 

> I never thought of it that way! You could be right! Or maybe it is what Lubistch was going for, a momentary befuddlement of our senses...did it all really exist before? Or was I (Karl, the audience) only dreaming? Sometimes memories are like dreams. In fact, once an experience passes into memory, I guess it is the same as a dream, it is an idea that sparks emotion and longing.

 

That's beautiful.

 

I think that was what he was going for. I think we are meant to reflect on time passing but also on the nature of dreams and memory.

 

> Bless old Kellerman! I was so happy when he turned up, just as you say, some good "angel" always turned up just when Karl H. needed them most.

 

Oh I think I would have died if he hadn't turned up right at that time!

 

> The way Lubitsch weaves the ironies...here is a boy grown into a man who never really got to be a boy ("Stay young, Karl Heinrich!" urged Dr. Juttner) and when he finally gets to experience some joy and freedom, he is right away snatched backward into the old, staid, dead world of tradition. Then he tries to go back but the past is dead. Irony of ironies that being trapped by a world that is living in the past he tries to escape by going back into the past.

 

Now that is brilliant - brilliant of Lubitsch and brilliant of you to catch. The way you say it seems so simple, but I am dadgummed if I could have ever have been able to pull that from the movie except as a miasma in my brain.... I KNOW I couldn't say it so well. I might have had an inkling of it, but it would never have formed itself into words. I can go round and round something and never ever be able to get it down understandably.

 

I am quite sure you have completely gotten what Lubitsch wanted his audiences to see.

 

>That's right, they see his "function" not him.

 

"A prince is a human being, after all."

 

>When his train arrives in the beginning, I was expecting a young man...again, what a great intro.

 

So was I!

 

>Lubitsch shows all this pomp and circumstance and what steps out...a tiny, delicate looking little innocent child. What a contrast!! It's really monstrous to think this receptive little creature is to be molded into an automaton, a functionary of noblesse oblige.

 

Oh he has this fantastic buildup to that scene - the entire opening of the movie! it would be funny if it weren't so sad.

 

The Carl Davis score was perfect....perfect. He's always good, but in this case, I think he was great. To me, it was possibly the best score he's done, as far as following the emotional cues from the director. And that's saying a lot, since he's pretty much the best there is and my favorite composer of silent film scores.

 

I totally missed that episode of the screen directors playhouse! I could kick myself. I totally see a Robert Vaughan - George Sanders connection. They could come from the same family. They have a look down your nose type of thing going on.

[bagladymimi]

I missed this film. I am sorry because I love Norma Shearer and Lubitsch, too. From all that you have said, it sounds like it is really good!

[Bronxgirl48]

>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ah, yes, YOUNG MR. LINCOLN! Thank you, Goddess! I was wracking my brain trying to remember where I heard that beautiful music before. I should have known.

 

 

I'm drinking in, or should I say sipping like the finest champagne, the eloquent back-and-forth discussions by you and Jackie on THE STUDENT PRINCE IN OLD HEIDELBERG.

 

Edited by: Bronxgirl48 on Jan 4, 2012 7:57 PM

[Bronxgirl48]

Okay, I saw ONCE UPON A HONEYMOON and I'm glad, so I never have to see it again. This is harsh, I know, lol. You're right -- "Notorious-Lite". The laboriously shifting tonalities/genres gave me a headache. I was hard-pressed to keep track: comedy (subdivided by leaps from, no, wait, subdivided by screwball and romantic) drama (subdivided by mystery, suspense, spy, thriller) This movie has more subdivisions than NO DOWN PAYMENT. I think I "got" what McCarey was trying to do, but throwing in the kitchen sink and having the camera constantly linger on Ginger's beautifully expressive, emotion-filled face (yes, yes, we KNOW you can act!) did not impress me one whit. I sensed her rapport with Grant; she seemed to have a personal appreciation of him as an actor, and he for her, so there was chemistry after a fashion. Slezak could play this part in his sleep, and it showed. I was embarrassed by the ending, which fell flat, like Ginger's "celebrate American regional dialects" interaction with Albert Dekker.

 

Edited by: Bronxgirl48 on Jan 4, 2012 7:00 PM

[rohanaka]

I'm glad, so I never have to see it again

 

Oh poor Bronxie.. don't hide things from me, now.. ha. Tell me how you REALLY felt about it!! (ha!)

 

This is harsh, I know

 

No, kid.. everyone has their own "cup o tea" and I think this is just a film that did not stand out much for some.. but I just saw it differently. (ha.. but what can I say.. I myself AM a bit different sometimes.. but let's don't go THERE! ha) We all find things to like and dislike about different films and sometimes what strikes one person will just leave others flat.. c'est la vie, little darlin'.

 

You are right (and I think I mentioned this in an earlier post) that it is a hard film to catergorize.. and it goes up and down a lot (between the funny and serious, etc) and I agree. that ending was just not anything that I wanted it to be... but I did enjoy it still.

 

Thanks for giving it the old college try, though, youngun. Maybe the next one to come along will leave you with a smile. :-)

[SansFin]

> {quote:title=Bronxgirl48 wrote:}{quote}

> I was hard-pressed to keep track: comedy (subdivided by leaps from, no, wait, subdivided by screwball and romantic) drama (subdivided by mystery, suspense, spy, thriller)

 

I have read a synopsis which said: "Fun-loving couple battle Nazi spies". That does not seem to be an attractive premise.

 

I like it very much. I fully understand why many people will not like it. I believe it is very much a niche movie. It seems that people either love it or hate it. There is little middle-ground.

 

I recommend you take two aspirin and watch either: *How to Steal a Million* or *Notorious* until the pain from watching *Once Upon a Honeymoon* goes away.

[Bronxgirl48]

Oh, ro, I really wish I could have enjoyed HONEYMOON more, because the serious issues were handled respectfully but not heavy-handedly as you said. For me, though, I had more problems with the so-called humorous elements, which we all know weave themselves, as in life, into the tragedies. But I didn't crack a smile when Cary posed as the tailor and proceeded to measure Ginger. Or when he played the saxophone to supposedly distract Walter from carrying out his connubial intentions on the train.

 

Speaking of trains, does anyone doubt that Edward G. Robinson as Barton Keyes in DOUBLE INDEMNITY would question how Myrna Loy meets her fate in THIRTEEN WOMEN? His "little man" would really be acting up, lol.

 

Edited by: Bronxgirl48 on Jan 4, 2012 8:00 PM

[Bronxgirl48]

I don't love or hate HONEYMOON. It just kind of fell flat with me. The story is both of its time yet timeless; therefore important, but I thought the awkward script and direction bit off a bit more than it could chew; not that the serious issues shouldn't have been even superficially explored, not at all, it's just that I thought the execution didn't match the bittersweet, humanistic idealism of its conception. Probably Billy Wilder could have gotten away with this plot.

 

Oooh, Wyler and Hepburn! There's a winning combination, but would you believe I've never seen HOW TO STEAL A MILLION?

 

Edited by: Bronxgirl48 on Jan 4, 2012 7:50 PM

[SansFin]

> {quote:title=Bronxgirl48 wrote:}{quote}

> Oooh, Wyler and Hepburn! There's a winning combination, but would you believe I've never seen HOW TO STEAL A MILLION?

 

You are a poor deprived child!

 

Peter O'Toole is as tall, dark and charming as any leading man ever was! That he is a bit of a rogue makes him even more irresistible.

 

Audrey Hepburn had great comedic instincts. She tries to be cool in situations where it is obvious she has no idea what she is doing.

 

The settings are glamorous. The script is tight. The pacing is perfect.

 

I wish very much to tell you of all the wonderful moments. They would all be spoilers.

 

I beg you to please watch this movie as quickly as you can so that we may share chuckles by telling of our favorite scenes. I will give a hint by saying I always laugh aloud at the scene which includes iodine!

 

I hate to promote such a channel but *How To Steal a Million* will be shown on FMC on:

February 12, 2012 9:03 am ET

February 24, 2012 11:00 am ET

 

It is very sad that this discussion did not occur yesterday as it was shown this morning.

 

Edited by: SansFin on Jan 4, 2012 8:25 PM to add FMC data

[Bronxgirl48]

Eeek, I hate iodine, lol! Seriously, I'll check out HOW TO STEAL A MILLION. Actually I've stayed away from it, thinking that, even with Hepburn and Wyler, it might be one of those in-the-wake-of-Bond romantic comedy spy thrillers all the rage in the mid '60's, a la CAPRICE, and what's the one with Sophia Loren and Gregory Peck? Wait, I just remembered, ARABESQUE. All these things with the "hep" pychedelic special effects, lol, which never blend well with old-school Hollywood glamour.

 

You know what? Perhaps if McCarey had cut HONEYMOON down by at least 45 minutes, he could have pulled off, if not a classic, then something maybe fairly memorable. It's just too long.

 

 

It's freezing here in Boca. I've got the heat on and am wearing a sweatshirt and long pants. Slept with a comforter last night, for goodness sakes. Supposed to warm up tomorrow.

 

 

I think I'll make myself a cup of hot chocolate now, and maybe watch CONTRABAND on YouTube.

 

 

I saw GAMES on Retroplex last night. It's also on YouTube!

Simone Signoret, James Caan, and Katherine Ross. Curtis Harrington pays his respects to DIABOLIQUE! Will talk about it tomorrow.

 

Edited by: Bronxgirl48 on Jan 4, 2012 8:49 PM

[SansFin]

The iodine is in a squirmy little scene that is very precious.

 

You need have no fear of psychedelics. It is much more like *Roman Holiday* (1953) than like *In Like Flint* (1967). The screenplay was written by Harry Kurnitz who also wrote the screenplays for: *The Happy Road* (1957) and *One Touch of Venus* (1948). It is tres chic. She wears Givenchy and he drives a classic Jaguar E-type. It is set in the world of art with Cezanne and Van Gogh paintings and a Cellini sculpture. The only grungy part is a janitor's closet. The only thing that swirls is a child's toy. The only thing mod is her hat and glasses in the opening scene.

 

She drives the cutest little car in the world:

 

The night here is cool and crisp and the sky is full of tiny stars. I thought of building a fire in the fireplace. It is sad to say the television in the living room is wonky so I will headquarter in the bedroom. I have all prepared for making tvorozhniki after my bath and I have put a tub of sour cream on ice so it will be ready. I should watch *How to Steal a Million* (1966) as it is much on my mind and it is very dear to my heart as it is the first movie Capuchin and I saw together. I feel I might though watch *Cluny Brown* (1946) and then *Heaven Can Wait* (1943). It just seems like a Charles Boyer and Don Ameche kind of night.

 

I hope all have a good night!