RAMBLES Part II

[SansFin]

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

> 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.

 

I do hope you enjoyed it. I have watched it again so I would be sure I had the correct movie in mind.

 

I felt the performances were all magnificent! It would have been so very easy for Katherine Ross to overact in the role. I found her tension and barely-contained fear rather than outward hysterics to be perfect. I felt James Caan was a tiny bit more smug than need be at times. Those moments were few and far between and they had no substantial impact on the movie.

 

Simone Signoret glided through the movie as if it was all perfectly natural for her. She was elegant, graceful and self-possessed in every scene!

 

It is sad to say the basic plot and ending were far from a surprise to me as I saw Deathtrap which obviously borrowed heavily from this script. That did not ruin the movie for me but I must feel that having the foreknowledge robbed much of the tension of the latter half of the movie.

 

I know that now that I have said how good I think it is that you will say the story was trite, the acting overblown and the sets tacky or some such things. C'est la vie!

[JackFavell]

*How to Steal a Million* is a great movie! You would love it Bronxie. I especially love Hugh Griffith as Audrey's father. Sansfin, you make me want to watch it immediately.

 

I still have a bottle of champagne left over from New Year's..... I think they might go together well.

[CineMaven]

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? ;-)

 

I dunno WHAT this place is coming to (though I have a few choice ideas) but at least I have a coupla pals to wander around with. I'll put breadcrumbs along the trail so you ladies can find me and pull me back onto the path. I've ordered "The Student Prince..." in its VHS form. (How's that for going 'Old School') which I'll get on Friday. The discussion will probably have moved on...but that's okay.

 

At least I will have discovered something new...and perhaps something I can learn from.

[JackFavell]

I think you'll appreciate the directing, at the very least.

[Bronxgirl48]

It's funny, I bought some frozen perogies at the supermarket this afternoon and could use a lot of sour cream on ice. I even forgot to get the apple sauce.

 

I do like ONE TOUCH OF VENUS so I suppose I'll have to see HOW TO STEAL A MILLION. Is it better than CHARADE? (don't see how it could be...) And what's the other 60's caper thing -- GAMBIT? I've avoided that one too even though I'm a Michael Caine fan.

 

It warmed up a bit but as far as I'm concerned, ANY night is good for Don Ameche and Charles Boyer.

 

 

So you anticipate me ragging on GAMES, lol? I did think Katherine Ross's natural vacuity perfect for the sleeping-beauty character she plays. When the incident with the Neanderthal Don Stroud occurs in the kitchen, nary a flicker of emotion crosses her face. But then, of course, it wasn't supposed to, was it? How empty a vessel does a woman have to be to think James Caan (pitch-perfect) is Prince Charming? I really enjoyed the fairy tale "subtext"; for instance, pipe Katherine's little-girl hair and outfits, also Signoret's cape. Note too all the looking glasses.

Simone, Simone, oh...my...goodness! As Lisa Schindler, she is simply fascinating -- unctuous, perverse, cynical, oddly vulnerable, wry, calculating, the ultimate survivor. I was riveted by her chilling performance, filled with sinister reserves of energy, such twisted humanity. Lots of plot holes, and, even though I don't remember DEATHTRAP, was (almost) able to figure everything out, which didn't negate the suspense for me.

 

Edited by: Bronxgirl48 on Jan 6, 2012 11:56 AM

[Bronxgirl48]

Okay, on your and SansFin's recommendation, I won't be a stranger to HOW TO STEAL A MILLION anymore!

 

Have you ever seen GAMES? It's on YouTube. Simone Signoret is terrific! You won't be able to take your eyes off her! (oh, and by the way, Estelle Winwood shows up for that extra pop of eccentricity, lol, as a dotty, nosy neighbor with a cat named Valentino)

 

Edited by: Bronxgirl48 on Jan 5, 2012 9:52 PM

[SansFin]

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

> And what's the other 60's caper thing -- GAMBIT? I've avoided that one too even though I'm a Michael Caine fan.

 

I like *Gambit* (1966) very much.

 

It is _not_ a movie I recommend because there are no guarantees and I do not wish to be held responsible if a person watches it and feels they wasted nearly two hours of their life.

 

It has a storytelling style so odd that when I wished to use it in a TCM Programmer's Challenge I could find only one other movie structured in the same way. I will not explain further as it is definitely one that should be experienced with no foreknowledge.

 

Michael Caine is classic Michael Caine. Shirley MacLaine is oddly reserved, elegant and moreover silent for the first half of an hour! Then the floodgates open and she is typically wacky. Herbert Lom embraced his role as a charming, sophisticated, traditional and shrewd native. John Abbott is a delight!

 

There is nothing mod or psychedelic about it. Other than major twists at beginning and end it is a classic story of an unprincipled crook going up against a man who might have him killed on principle.

 

I know the director best from *Hopscotch* (1980) and *Man with a Million* (1954). His touch is more for good-natured people making quips rather than buffoons going for belly-laughs or doing pratfalls.

 

I do not know if any movie with Shirley MacLaine can truly be called a quiet comedy but this one comes close.

[bagladymimi]

I love Michael Caine, so I can take Gambit because of him. But I don't think it is a great movie. However, it is much better to me than Games because I find James Caan unbearable. He became so arrogant after he won the Oscar for playing Sonny in The Godfather, that I can't stand to watch him in anything except Misery - and that's only because he is the victim in that movie.

 

I loved One Touch Of Venus - I was probably about 12 or 13 when I first saw it and thought it was the most romantic movie I had seen up until that time. For years, I couldn't remember the title. Back then we didn't have the resources to find out about these movies. I could remember the plot, Ava Gardner, and the song "When You Speak Low", but that was it. It took me years of buying books about movies to finally find out what it was. And even then, it wasn't out on video. I finally saw that it was on one Saturday in the middle of the night and taped it so that I could finally watch it again.

 

You have to remember that we in Nashville didn't get VCR's until 1977, so if you wanted to watch a classic, you had to stay up to watch it. I didn't get to see Citizen Kane until 1977 (before we got a VCR). It came on at 2:00 AM and I stayed up to watch it on a local station. We didn't get cable out where I lived until probably the mid 80's. And of course, I didn't get TCM until 1998 when I moved into a condo where I could get Comcast. Thank God for TCM - I really mean that!

 

Sorry to go on for so long - thanks for indulging an old woman's ramblings!

 

Edited by: bagladymimi on Jan 6, 2012 1:04 AM

[lzcutter]

> because I find James Caan unbearable. He became so arrogant after he won the Oscar for playing Sonny in The Godfather, that I can't stand to watch him in anything except Misery - and that's only because he is the victim in that movie.

 

Mimi,

 

Just a fyi, James Caan was nominated for his supporting role in *The Godfather* (along with Al Pacino and Robert Duvall) but Joel Grey took the Oscar home that year for his supporting role in *Cabaret*.

[bagladymimi]

Sorry, I thought he won it. Joel Grey was better anyway!

[gagman66]

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

>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alas, *THE STUDENT PRINCE IN OLD HEIDELBERG* has far from been restored. The Thames Silents version that TCM shows was produced clear back in 1984 for British TV. It was prepared from a acetate Safety-transfer that likely dates back to the 1950's. So unless more recent work has been done that I don't know about, it could easily be given a fresh transfer and new broadcast master and look much better today. Closer to the original qulaity of the fine grain Nitrate original of 1927. I imagine existing materials are at least 3 generations removed for the camera negative and probably more like 4 or 5. Given that it is one of Ernst Lubitsch finest films, probably his best surviving American Silent I would think there would be more interest in a comprehensive restoration being done.

 

 

Incidentally, have you seen *THE MARRIAGE CIRCLE (1924)?* It has a great All-Star Cast, and is really the film that established Lubitsch as Top director in States after his leaving Germany.It used to be on DVD in gorgeous print (much Crisper than Old Heidelberg), from Image Entertainment, with a great Mont Alto Motion Picture Orchestra score. Don't know if it is still available or not? Could be out of print by this time.

 

Another Lubitsch Silent that was recently restored is *THREE WOMEN (1924)* with Pauline Frederick, May McAvoy and Marie Prevost. I have been hoping this might eventually pop up on TCM. The film was originally released by Warner Brothers. The same with *SO THIS IS PARIS* (1926). The latter which aired in beautifully a restored print on TCM France in 2010.

 

My most wanted of Lubitsch Silent films has to be the seldom screened *FORBIDDEN PARADISE* with Pola Negri, Rod La Rocque, Adolphe Menjou, and Pauline Starke. I've seen a condensed version of this and it is fabulous. Sadly, Paramount continues to surpress the complete picture for anything other than an occasional live screening event. Very difficult film to see.

[JackFavell]

*The Marriage Circle* is almost like the anti -*Student Prince*. It's premise is so cynical that they don't even seem like they could be directed by the same man, though the Lubitsch touch gives everything away. I do like it, but I would not watch *The Marriage Circle* right after *Old Heidelberg.*

[JackFavell]

I'll check out *Games* if you watch How to Steal a Million, but only because of Simone Signoret. She's a fantastic, very underrated actress.

[Bronxgirl48]

It's a deal! I just wish MILLION was on YouTube.

 

Let me start you on GAMES. I can't say enough about Simone's performance in this fairly stylish, "t.v.-movie"-type thriller. Her Lisa Schindler (and I think the last name is significant) is a woman who has seen man's inhumanity to man, the horrors of war, the cruelties and injustices of life (including growing old) in general. Lisa could never rely on the kindness of strangers for protection, but has had to learn to depend only on herself. You'll see.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcCTrvDp3AA

 

 

[Bronxgirl48]

Saw GAMBIT last night! (on YouTube) If I had known Ronald Neame was the director, I would have checked this out long ago. Didn't he do (or collaborate on the screenplay) for the wonderful and very British BELLES OF ST. TRINIANS?

 

I have to say I was pleasantly surprised by GAMBIT! It seemed almost like an anti-heist film to me in many ways. I didn't originally "get" the narrative trick at the beginning but it finally dawned on me, lol. I loved Shirley's performance! She was a ditz, but a multi-layered one. "Can I help it if my mind goes off on tangents?" Good chemistry with Caine.

[Bronxgirl48]

Another 60's spy spoof I never heard of (and directed by Neame) is on YouTube: A MAN COULD GET KILLED. I'll watch it today and report back.

 

 

[FrankGrimes]

I wasn't into *The Student Prince in Old Heidelberg*. The only part of the film that I cared for was the end, when life in Heidelberg had detioriated. It had become a shadow of itself. All that was left was memories of a fond time gone by. That was great. So what I liked most about the film is the memories of youth and how they can be lived and lived again in your mind and heart.

 

It was nice to see where *Roman Holiday* took its story, though. Now that's a film that does make me cry at the end. I didn't do so once with *The Student Prince in Old Heidelberg*.

[FrankGrimes]

*The Marriage Circle is almost like the anti -Student Prince. It's premise is so cynical that they don't even seem like they could be directed by the same man, though the Lubitsch touch gives everything away. I do like it, but I would not watch* *The Marriage Circle right after* *Old Heidelberg.*

Maybe that's the trick for me!

[MissGoddess]

It's too "soft" for you I'm sure, and the setting isn't for you. I don't believe however that the movie is saying you can go back in memories, just the opposite. You cannot go back if the heavy hand of the past and tradition remains on your back. The past is dead and can be death-dealing, on many levels.

[SansFin]

It is now my time to truly wish all here a Happy Christmas!

 

I have only a little yet to do for our Christmas Eve supper. I am hoping the weather clears a little so we may see the first star. It is sad to say there will be no carolers here. We will spend the evening listening to them on YouTube and we will watch some movies. In the morning we will have to drive nearly eighty miles to the nearest church with a Christmas mass. We will spend most of the day visiting friends.

 

I wish you all the blessing of the season!

[FrankGrimes]

*It's too "soft" for you I'm sure,*

 

I'm sure that's part of it. It's definitely a soft film.

 

*and the setting isn't for you.*

 

But I love the Lubitsch/Chevalier films! Those are great.

 

*I don't believe however that the movie is saying you can go back in memories, just the opposite. You cannot go back if the heavy hand of the past and tradition remains on your back. The past is dead and can be death-dealing, on many levels.*

 

What I'm saying is that you are left with your memories of the past. That's always a double-edged sword since the feelings can make you feel wonderful but knowing you can't return to them can be very tough to deal with.

 

I actually think of this message board as "Heidelberg."

[wouldbestar]

{font:Times New Roman} {font}

 

{font:}{color:black}What a nice surprise this morning! *Tomorrow is Another Day* is the movie I was thinking of when we discussed Steve Cochran on another thread but couldn't remember the title of. It's been over 50 years since I'd seen it and it was still great. The details weren't exactly as I'd remembered so it was almost like seeing a new film but the love story was still there. That's why I liked it; even social misfits like them could fall in love and make it work. Cochran and Ruth Roman made a great couple. Thank you TCM; that's why my cable bill's worth paying.{font}

 

{font:Times New Roman} {font}

[JackFavell]

darn it! That was the one I wanted to see today, wouldbestar! I had it marked and everything then I completely missed it. I am so glad you were able to see it after all these years, I remember your post about it.

 

Frank, what do you mean that the message boards are like Heidelberg? You like coming here? or you wish it was like it was at the beginning and you keep trying to get back to something that has long passed?

[MissGoddess]

I thought I'd put a link below for anyone interested in Peter Bogdanovich's review of *The Student Prince in Old Heidelberg*. It was very interesting to learn that the hilltop scenes were not directed by Lubitsch, but by John M. Stahl (Leave Her to Heaven) at MGM's insistence.

 

http://blogs.indiewire.com/peterbogdanovich/the-student-prince-in-old-heidelberg?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed

 

What I'm saying is that you are left with your memories of the past. That's always a double-edged sword since the feelings can make you feel wonderful but knowing you can't return to them can be very tough to deal with.

 

I'm not sure he'll ever feel wonderful remembering, only pain.

[CineMaven]

ANOTHER DAY IS SPOILED...OH YEAH, IT'S SPOILED:

 

Hello Namesake! - "What a nice surprise this morning! Tomorrow is Another Day is the movie I was thinking of when we discussed Steve Cochran on another thread but couldn't remember the title of. It's been over 50 years since I'd seen it and it was still great. The details weren't exactly as I'd remembered so it was almost like seeing a new film but the love story was still there. That's why I liked it; even social misfits like them could fall in love and make it work. Cochran and Ruth Roman made a great couple. Thank you TCM; that's why my cable bill's worth paying." - WOULDBESTAR

 

I died and went to heaven when I saw these two...

 

THE CRUEL...COLD...DARK BEAUTY

 

 

I have never heard of this movie. Well...only in relation to a Scarlett O?Hara line. I recorded it to continue my collection of Ruth Roman films. I didn?t know what the heck to expect; it's better that way. I was pleasantly surprised. "TOMORROW IS ANOTHER DAY" reveals a couple of layers I enjoyed.

 

THE BOY CAN ACT

 

STEVE COCHRAN plays an ex-con just released from prison. I always liked Cochran...his tough guy persona...his lush deep dark looks and hirsuteness. But that's not quite what a got in "Tomorrow..." (no tough-guy, but still his killer looks). See, he's been in prison for eighteen years since he was a thirteen-year old boy. So his new life on the outside is really quite an adjustment. And Cochran plays him throughout as slightly emotionally stunted. He never waivers from that, and it's always subtly evident; this is a testament to his (very under-rated) acting. (His dark humor in "Deadly Companions" was an eye-opener as well). There was a boyishness to him in "Tomorrow...". He was hurt, defensive, mistrustful. There was a sweetness to him that endeared him to me.

 

Now remember, he was thirteen when he went into prison eighteen years ago. When it dawned on my thick skull what that really meant, I confess it quickened my pulse a bit, seeing how good Cochran looks. And the first woman he falls for?

 

Brittle, hard as nails, bottle blonde Ruth Roman. Mama mia!! The poor lug doesn't know what hit him.

 

TEN CENTS A DANCE IS SOMETIMES A HIGH PRICE TO PAY

 

He's socially awkward, and sweet as well; and that makes for an apt pupil. She sees "something" in this young man. Uhmmmm... mostly, she sees a patsy.

 

A STAGEDOOR JOHNNY....WITH NO BAUBLES, BANGLES and BEADS??

 

Using his prison pay, he buys her a gold-plated watch. (Awww, it's no Krupp diamond, but it means just as much). She can't let herself be soft. It's a hard cold cruel world for a blonde alone. With a twist of fate thanks Ruthie's previous paramour, she convinces Cochran he's murdered that man... when it was she who pulled the trigger.

 

ON THE LAM

 

This is some kind of wildly subversive Hitchcockian plot twist. Not only is Cochran, 'the wrong man' but he THINKS he IS the man. "Tomorrow Is Another Day" is a unique "on-the-lam" tale because she?s tricked him into thinking he must run. He never wants to go back to prison, he?s never really ever able to breathe comfortably, he thinks she?s going to tell on him...so he's always on edge. Not the fey-jittery-Farley Granger-edge, but a darker weightier edge. She's actually kind of holding him hostage with her secret. It makes you feel sorry for him.

 

And the laugh's on her when she realizes she's hitched her little caboose to a convicted murderer. (Into the frying pan, Ruthie?)

 

They're on the lam. They change clothes and hitch rides. (How ironic that he gets a ride from the trucker hauling cars. See the movie and you?ll know what I mean). They're not out in the open. They do a lot of walking, and hopping on trains. They talk. He's a survivor in this environment. They register in a seedy motel as man and wife with phony identities. Ruth still holds Cochran at arm's length. "Don't get any ideas, buster" is easier said than done; she's warming up to him. In spite of herself, she slowly falls for Cochran. In an effort to disguise herself from The Law, Ruth dyes her blonde hair brunette. Yay!!! Finally! It's Ruthie, dark and lovely, like we know and love her. Cochran's man/boy gets plenty of ideas. After all, they're now married (if in name only)...it has been eighteen years...and it IS Ruth Roman. Ruth turns girlish, asks him if he likes her new hair color. He does. He likes her. He loves her. The wait is over...they really become man and wife here.

 

TRUST...THE BEGINNING OF LOVE

 

 

Now a brunette, her glam toned down and her softness under the formerly hard-veneer revealed, Ruth and Cochran catch a break helping migrant farmers: LURENE TUTTLE and RAY TEAL. (Hear me loud and clear TCM: I suggest, request, DEMAND a LURENE TUTTLE day from TCM!!!) Ruth has softened considerably and Cochran seems more at ease. She's toned down her hardness and he takes the lead a bit in their new life together. It's funny, even if she has to scold him she never pulls out the beeyotch card, but does it a maternal wifely way. They live the life of lettuce pickers in a small itinerant California community. Whoa! This is far afield from the bright lights of a 40-watt bulb dirty dance hall, and Ruthie takes to it. It was easily and subtly done to watch her warm up to Cochran and gain his trust. I'd say, he's gained trust as well. She's wifey now in a little wooden shack...making dinners, sewing patterns, and pregnant to boot. (What'd I tell ya...an apt pupil). They're both able to breathe.

 

CONFLICT, AS USUAL, REARS ITS GREEDY, UGLY HEAD

 

Cochran's true identity is discovered by Tuttle and Teal (sounds like an old vaudeville team, doesn't it?) and trust begins to break down with everybody. There's a conflict about turning them in or not. After all, a $1,000 reward is a lot of "lettuce." (D'Ohhhhhhh!!) And there's a conflict about whether to flee the town or not. I know sometimes folks down't want the music score to dictate their emotions, but I thought the music here was used very well to illustrate tension and distrust, and not dictate it. I will not dare spoil this movie for those who haven't seen it yet. (I'm not that kind of Maven). But I must laud Lurene Tuttle's acting here. She's one of the great character actors who can do comedy and drama. Here in "Tomorrow" she has the earnest, sweetest, gentle, forceful gravitas of an accomplished actress who walks a razor's edge like others might walk in the park. Her character is in conflict about a choice some might find easy to make...and that she struggles with this choice is a testimony to Tuttle.

 

I recorded this movie to add to my Roman collection. Drooling over Steve Cochran is a no-brainer, for me but I really enjoyed his consistency of character. My admiration for Lurene Tuttle was heightened. And the way "Tomorrow Is Another Day" weaved its tale of folks still trapped by circumstances, and the growing love of two distrusting people was an added bonus for me.