RAMBLES Part II

[MissGoddess]

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

> I'm afraid it's going to sink your estimation of women even further and I can already hear you calling me a "Cathy".

>

> Ha.. let's leave the light on for him.. (in the window) and see what he gets... HA!!!!

 

LOL!!!!!!! Good one, ha!!!

[FrankGrimes]

Hmmmm I don't know if I can totally get that picture in my head for him.. he was his "own" man for sure and can maybe see some comparison to Rhett in that I imagine he did not intend in any way to fall in love with Angelique.. (before he met her, he was likely a "love 'em and leave 'em" kind of guy) But although he might have been a "victim" of love (sort of).. I don't think she really intended to break his heart by going w/ Sydney (out of spite) I think she more or less "fell into it" by circumstances.

 

I was just comparing how we really don't know anything about what has made Rhett Butler how he is. He and Ralls are rather similar in the kind of men they are.

 

And I think Ralls blamed himself for losing her more than he blamed her. If he had stuck around (instead of running off) after the "fire" incident.. I think she'd have gotten over the shock of it all and likely would not have been such easy prey for Sydney to marry. (but I might need to rewatch it again. ha. Only a day or so and already the details are getting fuzzy.. ha Did I mention I am getting forgetful in my old age??)

 

They both blamed themselves.

 

Angelique: The mistakes I've made.

 

Ralls: Not yours, Angelique. Mine. All of them mine.

 

 

SPOILER

 

It was at that. Though (here I go again w/ my whining...ha) I wish there maybe had been a bit more "drama" to it. For me it was not very "suspenseful". Maybe I am used to more "nail biting" tension from some of his other action movies.. ha. Anyway.. I think it was very "mystical" in a way with the sunset and the images of them sailing off to sea at the end. Poetic is a good word.

 

I was very into the end because I did not expect it to end that way at all. I was pulling for Ralls to get the gold. I couldn't believe he didn't make it. John Wayne? This was the FIRST Wayne film I've seen where he was killed. I was shocked. And, please, don't anyone tell me other Wayne films where he is killed!

 

That was a GREAT line... and VERY telling. Up to that point you REALLY dont' know for sure whether he just TOTALLY hates Ralls or not.. but you truly do see the admiration for him (or at least his spirit) in that line.. EVERY man there.. including himself.. gets measured by Ralls.. and comes up lacking. And you really see the "love/hate/love/hate/love" thing going on for him.

 

It's a remarkable film in that we see both female love and male love for a man. They both admired and loved the guy for who he was.

[MissGoddess]

>

> You've already done that a thousand times over!

>

 

Well you make BOYS look pretty bad yourself, SON.

 

>

> She'll probably be a pussycat compared to you! You slap me the moment I say "hi"!

 

Because I know what's coming next! An insult!

[FrankGrimes]

Well you make BOYS look pretty bad yourself, SON.

 

That's a good thing! I make all other guys look a heckuva lot better. It's my best quality!

 

Because I know what's coming next! An insult!

 

What?! I never!

[MissGoddess]

That screencap is another moment that is very "Wuthering Heights".

 

I won't tell you the other Wayne films where he's killed, but each one is a shocker.

I watched one with my friend, who has seen a few Wayne pictures with me, and

we both didn't expect to see him go. We were questioning if we really saw right.

I said "No way, it's someone else" and she said "No, it was him!" We couldn't believe it.

 

So, do you think Ralls was grabbing the gold out of greed or to prove he

could do it or to try and "beat" the Red Witch? I'm not sure. I found it hard

to believe he'd sink back into greediness. Could he have had a death wish?

[rohanaka]

Super MEGA Wuthering Heights Spoilage:

 

I had no idea you felt this way about Wuthering Heights, Ro. I can see why

you'd find them hard to like, especially Cathy. Heathcliffe I think is easier to comprehend,

for he is, in his way, a very "pure" individual

 

You know.. I never thought of him that way.. but I can see how you are describing him.

 

I actually saw the "classic" movie for the first time AFTER I saw a made for TV one (I think it might have been on TNT maybe (??) or possibly another cable network.. that re-made it back in the late 90's) And OH me.. It is a bit different (in terms of intensity) from the one w/ Olivier and Oberon.. So I have to confess that MAY have been a part of what has shaped my mindset for those two characters all this time.. but in truth.. I LIKELY should read the book if I want to really get a feel for their true nature...

 

He lives only in his own ideas, or world,

and that world is Catherine and their kingdom is Pennistone Crag (not sure I'm spelling

that right, I don't have the book on hand). Without Catherine, he is lost. Even his quest

for revenge (this movie should have been included in TCM's "REvenge" theme this month!)

is tied to her.

 

She truly was the motivating force for his every thought (both good and evil) but the evil was also shaped by his "mis"treatment from the jealous brother (what was his name.. I am not remembering) I think the made for TV version REALLY played up Heathcliff's absolute HATRED for him and for his new wife too... (boy don't you just feel the MOST sorry for her in a way??) and he came off a LOT (a LOT) crueler in that TV movie than he does w/ Olivier. Again.. I do not know how he compares w/ the Heathcliff in the book.. but OH me.. he was awful.

 

And oh, my, one of my favorite scenes in all movies is when they open the door at Edgar and Catherine's house to see Heathcliffe standing there in all his new "glory", ha. He is SO much

more impressive than Edgar ever THOUGHT of being. But what a waste, why did evil impulses

have to make him conquer the world instead of love? So I do feel Catherine was justified, a little,

in being frustrated with him. But oh, goodness, the raging, nagging AGONY she felt when he came back, came back as the "king" she always commanded him to be. I love it! My kind of "tortured love" story!!

 

I think "evil impulse" is the right way to say it. And to me the most tragic thing of all is how they LOVE each other so much they begin to hate each other for it.. oh me.. it is a powerful concept. (in the TV version I saw.. Once she is gone.. he is so consumed by grief over her that he even digs her up.. just to hold her in his arms again! YIKES!! ha.. is THAT in the book???) Anyway.. I guess that is why I am looking forward to watching this again because I DO want to view it once more to see if I still am holding on to my pre-conceived disgust with the two of them that I know likely came from that first movie I watched.

 

Golly.. first impressions really are everything.. ha

[rohanaka]

was very into the end because I did not expect it to end that way at all. I was pulling for Ralls to get the gold. I couldn't believe he didn't make it. John Wayne? This was the FIRST Wayne film I've seen where he was killed. I was shocked. And, please, don't anyone tell me other Wayne films where he is killed!

 

Ha.. OK.. I won't tell you... but I WILL tell you there is one.. where I just about fell out of my CHAIR it was so shocking.. you think the movie is over.. and everyone is feeling pretty good..and it is the end..and then WHAMMO!!!! (I bet at least Chris knows which one I am talking about) OH I hate the end of that movie SO much!!

 

PS: Miss G:

 

+So,do you think Ralls was grabbing the gold out of greed or to prove he

could do it or to try and "beat" the Red Witch? I'm not sure. I found it hard

to believe he'd sink back into greediness. Could he have had a death wish+

 

I think it was A) he wanted to "beat" the Witch.. and maybe C) he MIGHT have had a death wish..But really.. I am not so sure about the whole "death wish" thing. I really think he just wanted a cut of the money so he could make a new start. I am not sure. I also think he went down there so no one else had to.. he knew it was too dangerous... and I think he did not want a "family man" to die for his misdeed.. (in terms of.. it was HIS fault the gold was down there to begin with.. so he was going to go get it) I don't really think it was about him getting rich off of it.. but I do think it is possible he saw his share of it as a way to "retire".

 

Edited by: rohanaka on Sep 6, 2010 11:35 PM

 

(and then edited again.. because I made a mistake on my "duke" movie.. they were not "going home".. yet.. gotta get my facts straight, Grey Dude, even if I CAN'T tell you what movie I am talking about, ha)

 

Edited by: rohanaka on Sep 7, 2010 1:22 AM

[FrankGrimes]

WAKE OF THE SPOILED RED WITCH

 

So, do you think Ralls was grabbing the gold out of greed or to prove he

could do it or to try and "beat" the Red Witch? I'm not sure. I found it hard

to believe he'd sink back into greediness. Could he have had a death wish?

 

I believe it's all you say. It's one last big score for Ralls. I mean, he sank the ship with the idea of getting the gold back. That was the goal. It's five million dollars, after all.

 

But, there's no doubt that Ralls felt as if he could conquer anything. He was fearless. So a strength becomes a weakness.

 

And, of course, the ending completes the love story.

[MissGoddess]

WUTHERING SPOILERS!!!

 

> I actually saw the "classic" movie for the first time AFTER I saw a made for TV one (I think it might have been on TNT maybe (??) or possibly another cable network.. that re-made it back in the late 90's) And OH me.. It is a bit different (in terms of intensity) from the one w/ Olivier and Oberon.. So I have to confess that MAY have been a part of what has shaped my mindset for those two characters all this time.. but in truth.. I LIKELY should read the book if I want to really get a feel for their true nature...

>

 

I've never seen the other version, well not all of it...but I think I know the one you mean.

How would you say it compares? Is it more "realistic" in tone, maybe?

 

> She truly was the motivating force for his every thought (both good and evil) but the evil was also shaped by his "mis"treatment from the jealous brother (what was his name.. I am not remembering) I think the made for TV version REALLY played up Heathcliff's absolute HATRED for him and for his new wife too... (boy don't you just feel the MOST sorry for her in a way??) and he came off a LOT (a LOT) crueler in that TV movie than he does w/ Olivier. Again.. I do not know how he compares w/ the Heathcliff in the book.. but OH me.. he was awful.

>

 

The brother is named "Grimes"...I mean "Hindley"!

 

I despised Hindley the way I despised the husband of Maureen O'Sullivan in

The Tall T. You'll see what I mean. he got absolutely what he deserved.

 

But oh poor Isabella (Geraldine Fitzgerald)! Hers is just as tragic...even MORE

tragic an outcome because she was not selfish as the other two were...she truly

loved Heathcliffe and he treated and used her abominably. That to me was his

worst, worst act. For though Cathy essentially did the same to Isabella's brother,

she at least tried to be a good wife and treated him well. Still, that was perhaps

because Cathy could be a hypocrite for the rest of her life, Heathcliffe could not.

I feel he loathed himself at that point, loathed himself and Cathy for driving him

to such a cruel and loathesome point.

 

As for the book, I've read it twice but not in recent years. All I remember is that

it was one of the grimmest, most depressing stories I ever read. Shocking, too,

from a supposedly "sheltered" daughter of a country parson. Heathcliffe is

pretty much as Olivier depicted him, though, at least in spirit, if the movie doesn't

depict all of his dark deeds.

 

>

> I think "evil impulse" is the right way to say it. And to me the most tragic thing of all is how they LOVE each other so much they begin to hate each other for it.. oh me.. it is a powerful concept. (in the TV version I saw.. Once she is gone.. he is so consumed by grief over her that he even digs her up.. just to hold her in his arms again! YIKES!! ha.. is THAT in the book???) Anyway.. I guess that is why I am looking forward to watching this again because I DO want to view it once more to see if I still am holding on to my pre-conceived disgust with the two of them that I know likely came from that first movie I watched.

>

 

I don't remember the grave scene in the book, but don't go by me. My memory

of it is very hazy, only that it was unpleasant to read.

 

I hope you can see it again, too. I, alas, don't even have it recorded and it is sadly

still not on DVD which is surprising since it's considered one of "the" classics of all time.

 

I did see it at the Museum of Modern Art once, about a year or two ago, though. That

was a treat. However the print was in scandalous condition. Really scratchy and it

even cut off, as if the reels were torn, in several places. It badly needs a huge restorative

effort.

 

One reason the '39 version may always be my favorite is the music...the love theme

is one of the most beautiful in classic cinema.

[rohanaka]

The HEIGHTS of Wuthering Spoilage:

 

How would you say it compares? Is it more "realistic" in tone, maybe?

 

It has been at least 10 or 12 years (maybe more) since I saw it.. but I would have to say that is is much darker. In some ways I remember liking it more than the 1939 version.. but not on the whole. I wish I could remember more for sure when I saw it.. but I know it was within the last 15 years anyway.

 

I despised Hindley the way I despised the husband of Maureen O'Sullivan in

The Tall T. You'll see what I mean. he got absolutely what he deserved

 

Hindley!! That's it. ha. Thank you for the reminder.. As for Maureen's husband.. ha. I will have to watch out for him when my copy of The Tall T comes in. I just LOVE to hate a good bad guy! :-)

 

oh poor Isabella (Geraldine Fitzgerald)! Hers is just as tragic...even MORE

tragic an outcome because she was not selfish as the other two were...she truly

loved Heathcliffe and he treated and used her abominably. That to me was his

worst, worst act

 

That's it exactly. She was totally a victim of their "fall out" so to speak.

 

As for the book, I've read it twice but not in recent years. All I remember is that

it was one of the grimmest, most depressing stories I ever read. Shocking, too,

from a supposedly "sheltered" daughter of a country parson.

 

THAT is how I remembering the other version I saw.. VERY dark...and grim.. that is the right word.

 

The ending is more about Cathy's daughter too.. and her "love interest" finally being free to get together. (rather than focusing on Heathcliff and Cathy.. together at last..ha) (I think the housekeeper is the narrator in this version.. I don't remember that being the case in the '39 version.. but I might be wrong) That is what I am remembering, anyway.

 

I, alas, don't even have it recorded and it is sadly still not on DVD which is surprising since it's considered one of "the" classics of all time.

 

Well guess what. ha.. YOU should be a TCM programmer.. ha. I just went in and looked it up and it IS part of the "Acts of Revenge" theme this month.. it is on the VERY last night (Sept 30) at 8PM. Maybe you can get it recorded! :-)

 

One reason the '39 version may always be my favorite is the music...the love theme

is one of the most beautiful in classic cinema

 

I am not recalling that but I will listen for it when I watch again. (I am thinking my copy will be in from the library in the next few days, I hope)

[rohanaka]

Ok.. HERE is the version I saw first... it came out (I think) in 1992.. but I know it has not been THAT long since I saw it because I know I watched it after the QT and I got married.. because I remember where I LIVED when I was watching.. ha.. Maybe it was not "made for TV" but I just saw it when it aired on tv a few years after it came out (maybe?) Or maybe I rented it.. GOLLY I don't know. ha. But I know this is the one I saw because I remember the whole Juliette Binoche and Ralph Fiennes thing... they were the leads. (now that I have seen the poster for it in my google search, ha)

 

 

[movieman1957]

>Ha.. OK.. I won't tell you... but I WILL tell you there is one.. where I just about fell out of my CHAIR it was so shocking.. you think the movie is over.. and everyone is feeling pretty good..and it is the end..and then WHAMMO!!!! (I bet at least Chris knows which one I am talking about) OH I hate the end of that movie SO much!!

 

 

I do. It surprised me too.

[rohanaka]

I do. It surprised me too

 

And then the one guy says he will finish the letter to his kid. Sniff.. Sob.. OH don't get me started. :-)

[JackFavell]

oh, MissG-

 

you are so on target about *Wuthering Heights* !

 

I can't add anything to what you write, but I can tell you some of the things about the movie that are truly memorable for me.

 

*SPOILED WUTHERS*

 

I absolutely love the way the movie is bookended - Flora Robson's voice-over starts the ball rolling and the whole introduction of Miles Mander, the lost traveler in the snow.....foolish, stumbling in on something he cannot fathom. I love the way the beginning and the end play. It really is exciting and scary, the ghost story being told..... the way that Heathcliffe and Isabella turn to look at the stranger, and how everything in the house is so....unkempt.....dead....

 

The cinematography - good old black and white never looked more magical.

 

The scene where Cathy and Heathcliffe are outside the window watching the ball at the Lyttons......sigh.... I always pray that this time, it will end differently. And you are right about the music, I can hear that dance right now as I am thinking about it. Very memorable.

 

I won't discuss any other scenes, for fear of real spoilage, but I just wanted to jump in and say you are so in tune with this movie - the way you explain the characters and their emotions and their actions is perfect!

 

Edited by: JackFavell on Sep 7, 2010 6:54 PM

[butterscotchgreer]

I've never seen the other version, well not all of it...but I think I know the one you mean.

How would you say it compares? Is it more "realistic" in tone, maybe?

 

Are ya'll talking about the version with Ralph Feinnes in 1992? I have seen that one a few times, but for me, it doesn?t compare to Olivier and Oberon. It was a little more toward the reality check side, but I didn?t get as emotional in this remake, because it didn?t seem as sincere as the original. I mean, us girls have to cry to Wuthering Heights, it?s just a moral imperative. Heehee! Larry Olivier plays a more sophisticated Heathcliffe and this remake made his character out to be a more violent person.

[MissGoddess]

WUTHERING SPOILERS!

 

> The ending is more about Cathy's daughter too.. and her "love interest" finally being free to get together. (rather than focusing on Heathcliff and Cathy.. together at last..ha) (I think the housekeeper is the narrator in this version.. I don't remember that being the case in the '39 version.. but I might be wrong) That is what I am remembering, anyway.

>

 

Oh, that doesn't sound right. I don't remember a daughter in the book, though I could be wrong. I like that the '39 version really keeps the focus on the attraction and antagonism between the lovers. And it convincingly lets you see why Heathcliffe does and feels all that he does. The most poignant scene to me is when he overhears Cathy and the housekeeper (Flora Robson) talking about Hindley and then Cathy's cruel remarks about Heathcliffe's dirty, surly behavior. He is so wounded, but we don't see him leave, we follow Cathy's conversation which turns to her love for Heatchliffe and the famous line she speaks, "I am Heathcliffe" (which I believe is from the book) only when the camera cuts away to where Heathcliffe was standing, we see he is gone. He never hears her words of love, only her condemnation and it drives him away. I felt dreadful for him.

 

>

> Well guess what. ha.. YOU should be a TCM programmer.. ha. I just went in and looked it up and it IS part of the "Acts of Revenge" theme this month.. it is on the VERY last night (Sept 30) at 8PM. Maybe you can get it recorded! :-)

>

 

Sensational! Thank you for the notice, I'll set a reminder.

 

> I am not recalling that but I will listen for it when I watch again. (I am thinking my copy will be in from the library in the next few days, I hope)

 

Very good. The music is really extraordinary.

[MissGoddess]

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

> Ok.. HERE is the version I saw first... it came out (I think) in 1992.. but I know it has not been THAT long since I saw it because I know I watched it after the QT and I got married.. because I remember where I LIVED when I was watching.. ha.. Maybe it was not "made for TV" but I just saw it when it aired on tv a few years after it came out (maybe?) Or maybe I rented it.. GOLLY I don't know. ha. But I know this is the one I saw because I remember the whole Juliette Binoche and Ralph Fiennes thing... they were the leads. (now that I have seen the poster for it in my google search, ha)

>

>

 

Thank you. I remember when that came out. I never saw it, because I'm not a fan of Juliette Binoche. I find her cold, not passionate at all like Catherine. And Ralph Fiennes always looked to me more like Edgar than Heathcliffe. Heathcliffe was a great, dark, hulk of a man, whereas Ralph is so delicate looking, so refined. The very opposite. That Irish actor would have been better, what's his name. The burly one....Liam Neeson.

 

 

Hi Butterscotch!

 

> Are ya'll talking about the version with Ralph Feinnes in 1992? I have seen that one a few times, but for me, it doesn?t compare to Olivier and Oberon. It was a little more toward the reality check side, but I didn?t get as emotional in this remake, because it didn?t seem as sincere as the original. I mean, us girls have to cry to Wuthering Heights, it?s just a moral imperative. Heehee! Larry Olivier plays a more sophisticated Heathcliffe and this remake made his character out to be a more violent person.

 

I can imagine. I bet they made him a mental case or a navel gazing, social misfit, ha! Olivier certainly carried himself nobly when he came back, and spoke better, but I like that he did not entirely discard his roughness which was as much a part of him as it was of the crags and bluffs he lived among. Heathcliffe is to be more elemental and earthy than civilized or human.

[MissGoddess]

Oh my goodness! The way Conrad Veidt strokes Vivien's hair is the

most thrilling thing I've ever seen!

 

Sorry for that necessary outburst. I shall resume rambling when

I've collected my wits.

[JackFavell]

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

> Oh my goodness! The way Conrad Veidt strokes Vivien's hair is the

> most thrilling thing I've ever seen!

 

I quite agree! I love this movie! I haven't seen it in years and years. So romantic and suspenseful.

 

I am recording like mad tonight.

[CineMaven]

> The HEIGHTS of Wuthering Spoilage

> SPOILED WUTHERS

> WUTHERING SPOILERS!

The wutherings are in bloom again. Such a delicate spoilage, suitable for every occasion.

 

Gimme a viskey, Liam on the side. And don? be stingeeeee baby!

[MissGoddess]

It is romantic, that is the very word for Dark Passage. Two beautiful, tragic

spy-lovers...

[movieman1957]

It is beautiful the way everyone moved from "Wake Of The Red Witch" to "Wuthering Heights" so seamlessly.

[rohanaka]

*And the Wuthering Spoilage Resumes:*

 

Hello there little missy...

 

Thank you. I remember when that came out. I never saw it, because I'm not a fan of Juliette Binoche. I find her cold, not passionate at all like Catherine. And Ralph Fiennes always looked to me more like Edgar than Heathcliffe

 

I don't know.. ha.. Fiennes looks pretty " dark" in this film. VERY grim, in fact. But you are right.. he is not "hulking". But he does a good job w/ the bitterness angle.. Though in some ways he takes it TOO far. I bet you are right.. Neeson would likely have done a very good job for the role. As for Binoche.. I am not sure I really recall her performance as well as I do his in this version.. it has been a really long time.

 

I can imagine. I bet they made him a mental case or a navel gazing, social misfit, ha

 

Think more "mental case" ha. He was nearly pathological. (strike the "nearly")

 

Little Miss Butterscotchie says: It was a little more toward the reality check side, but I didn?t get as emotional in this remake, because it didn?t seem as sincere as the original. I mean, us girls have to cry to Wuthering Heights, it?s just a moral imperative. Heehee! Larry Olivier plays a more sophisticated Heathcliffe and this remake made his character out to be a more violent person

 

That is a PERFECT way to contrast the two films.. You do get more sympathy going for Olivier's Heathcliff... and if memory serves.. even for Ms. Oberon's Cathy as well. The two more modern actors just play it very harsh.

 

Again.. I think there were aspects of this version that I like MORE than the '39 one.. but not on the whole. Overall.. I think the 1939 film gives you more of a feeling for the "romance" so in that regard it is more enjoyable..

 

Heathcliff and Cathy still come off "horrid" toward one another.. but it is not so completely grim (I keep using that word.. but it is the right one) and so wholly unlikeable as I am remembering the characters in the newer version to be. (and again.. THAT is the one I saw first.. so that is likely why I have always held such a grudge for those two.. ha.)

 

Oh, that doesn't sound right. I don't remember a daughter in the book, though I could be wrong. I like that the '39 version really keeps the focus on the attraction and antagonism between the lovers.

 

I went in and looked at that youtube (just to refresh my memory) and watched all of part one.. and the tail end of the last one (to see the beginning and the end) I was wrong about how much focus there is on the daughter (I THINK she is Cathy's daughter.. Her name is Cathy too.. and she is more or less made to marry Heathcliff's son (or the other way around) and then the son dies.. etc)

 

I really ought to watch the '92 one again to say for sure.. but I really do remember her as Cathy's daughter.. and I think Binoche played both roles.. (the younger Cathy is blonde.. like Linton) Anway.. it is SOMEONE living under Heathcliff's roof (after Cathy is gone) and when Heathcliff dies she is finally free to be w/ someone (maybe a hired hand) that she has fallen in love with. Anyway.. that is only a brief mention at the end (instead of being played up more like I thought) and then it goes on to Heathcliff and Cathy.. together at last (as it should be) for the final ending.

 

The most poignant scene to me is when he overhears Cathy and the housekeeper (Flora Robson) talking about Hindley and then Cathy's cruel remarks about Heathcliffe's dirty, surly behavior. He is so wounded, but we don't see him leave, we follow Cathy's conversation which turns to her love for Heatchliffe and the famous line she speaks, "I am Heathcliffe" (which I believe is from the book) only when the camera cuts away to where Heathcliffe was standing, we see he is gone. He never hears her words of love, only her condemnation and it drives him away. I felt dreadful for him.

 

That is a gut wrencher for sure. I do remember how strong that moment is... when we hear the words.. but HE does not.

[SansFin]

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

> It is beautiful the way everyone moved from "Wake Of The Red Witch" to "Wuthering Heights" so seamlessly.

 

They are different versions of the same story.

 

Ralls is Heathcliff. Angelique is Catherine. He rose from obscurity. They fell in love despite the difference in their stations in life. They were separated because of Sidneye/Hindley's persecution. They met just in time to declare their love for each other before death took them. She died before him. He was reunited with her after death.

 

Sidneye is also Edgar Linton. He found a place in Angelique/Catherine's heart when her lover was away.

 

Commissar Desaix is Lockwood. He is method for screenwriter to tell backstory and give information in the way that is not too boring.

 

The octopus is Isabella. Ralls/Heathcliff meets the octopus/Isabella because of wealth and desire to show up someone. Geraldine Fitzgerald was cast as Isabella because she looks as if she could have been sea serpent in another life.

[OllieTSB]

A quick aside... I wanted to re-nominate George Murphy for the Norma Desmond Memorial "We Have Faces" Award for his incredible, horror-filled performance out in that field in THE BORDER INCIDENT. I forget that Anthony Mann constructed two pretty incredible suspense-filled scenes at the end of this movie, and George's work is jaw-dropping. This should always be in my Must-See's List, if only because of the "in the field" and the "quicksand" scenes. Anthony Mann really knew how to create suspense and flat-out horror.

 

And George - how can anyone HELP but underestimate his ability? He's such a nuthin' character. But this performance tops his ARNELO AFFAIR even.