Jump to content

 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
TopBilled

Y-e-s! THE STORY OF TEMPLE DRAKE on TCM in September

Recommended Posts

I have never seen it before and I am VERY much looking forward to watching it... hope I can stay awake! :) Thanks for bringing it to our attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kudos to you, Fred, for being awake at that hour.

 

Dang and blast the overpriced crooks at FIOS (not for long, when I switch to the crooks at Cablevision because I had no landline as promised during Hurricane SANDY), or I could be taping via a DVR or my DVD/VCR player.

 

*Hey TCM, in the interest of old **** who can't stay awake, IS IT POSSIBLE TO RERUN THIS IN PRIMETIME????????????????????????????????????????????*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Thanks for bringing it to our attention.

 

Sure. It's one of the great pre-codes. And thanks to TCM it is now once again available to television audiences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This film starts about 10:30 my time, so I will probably fall asleep before it is over.

 

But I recorded it the first time TCM aired it, and I've seen it at least 5 times.

 

Young people today need to keep in mind that back in the old days, most "mature adults" had already read Faulkner's SANCTUARY, So the scenes from the book that aren't in the movie, a viewer has to make up, using the mental images of the movie characters.

 

This was one way Hollywood got around the old codes, and there was a code in effect before 1934. The newer code of 34 just became more strict, and it was even more strict by the 1940s.

 

But if Hollywood wanted to make a sensational movie out of a sensational book, they would promote the book in a lot of their advertising and in their trailers. That told the audience there would be additional stuff in the book that might not be in the movie. So, people "in the know" about these xxx films and books, would run out and buy the book and read it, sometimes before they saw the movie, so they would know exactly what had been cut out of the movie.

 

"Decency" censorship in this country originally included books. But gradually the Supreme Court allows vulgar stuff in books, but left it up to the individual states to censor the books. By the late 1920s, many states allowed for these books to be sold to adults, but they could not be sold to anyone under 18.

 

Sanctuary is the only Faulkner book I ever read. So, when I saw this film, I filled in the gaps where the studio had to leave stuff out.

 

Jack LaRue is just perfect for his role, and so is Miriam Hopkins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>But if Hollywood wanted to make a sensational movie out of a sensational book, they would promote the book in a lot of their advertising and in their trailers. That told the audience there would be additional stuff in the book that might not be in the movie. So, people "in the know" about these xxx films and books, would run out and buy the book and read it, sometimes before they saw the movie, so they would know exactly what had been cut out of the movie.

 

Good post. And of course, it boosted sales of the book. This also happened with KING'S ROW, FOREVER AMBER and PEYTON PLACE.

 

And it happened in the 1960s with FANNY HILL: MEMOIRS OF A WOMAN OF PLEASURE, a story that Miriam Hopkins also starred in when it was filmed. She was no stranger to controversial subject matter in movies.

 

1fanny.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*{font:arial, helvetica, sans-serif}Last night I got out my copy of PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE (1959). Some of you may remember that it was voted the worst movie ever made some years back.{font}*

 

{font:arial, helvetica, sans-serif}*Well, I'm here to tell you, boys and girls, that it is better than THE STORY OF TEMPLE DRAKE.* {font}

 

 

I know what you mean. That's why I'm going to watch it first, and if I decide it's a keeper I'll record it next time. I remember being bitterly disappointed in another much-heralded pre-code movie. But every movie isn't for everyone.

 

Thank heavens I'm on Central Time, so I only have to stay up until 1:15AM!

 

BLU

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even in the omitted scenes, Faulkner uses eliptical language.

 

Also, the ending was changed. The details of Temple's actions at the end of the film and her courtroom testimony are different in the book. I suppose it was changed both for dramatic purposes, and the need to simplify the action, as well as to better scrub Temple's character.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched this one again last night. It really amazed me how much artistry went into this picture. It is a masterpiece.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would call this an approximation of the novel. Besides the things they had to

leave out due to subject matter, parts of the plot were changed and with it

some of Temple's character. All in all, the Hollywood hacks still did a fairly

good job, but this just isn't the same as the book. So taking it as an "adaptation"

of the book, it falls short. Taken on its own terms as a somewhat stylish, overripe

melodrama with some interesting visual compositions, it's pretty good. I remember

Popeye/Trigger as less of a typical city slicker in the book, but maybe he wasn't.

And while they couldn't tell the actual corncob story, Miriam is shown with her

head surrounded by them just before Trigger comes in and things go to black.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't read the book in a long time, but as I remember, Popeye was an impotent, sociopathic monster. In Memphis, where she goes with Popeye, she seeks out other men to satisfy her awakened sexual appetite Popeye can't. I'm reminded of a comic Mad magazine did long ago comparing a book and the movie made from it, spoofing the sanitation, or sterilization that happened with the Hollywood treatment. In one frame, the book would have gritty, disheveled characters, and gory violence. In the next, the film would take place in Ozzy and Harriet suburbia, with coiffed and manicured actors, with almost anti-violence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been a while since I've read it too. Popeye is indeed impotent, that's why he

had to use a corncob to rape Temple. Of course they had to cut all that out, even

though there is a shot of Temple resting against a small pile of corncobs just before

the dirty deed is done. Maybe that was a little nod and wink to those who had read

the book. And the ending is changed so that Temple seems to be capable of redemp-

tion, whereas in the book she just goes to Europe and takes no responsibility for her

actions and just goes on with her previous life. In the movies, there would have been

a Code induced punishment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

OMG. No wonder the novel was hot stuff back in those days.........

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, just had a chance to catch this flick this morning---HOT stuff! I have never read the work on which it is based, but wow! Miriam Hopkins was just incredible in this, it seemed a role that really fit for her, and I always dig on Jack LaRue! William Gargan rocked the house as well! Great, great flick! Thanks, TCM, you guys are wicked cool!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I believe that was the novel that first brought Faulkner some name recognition--

even if it might have been more for the notorious subject matter than the writing.

It's certainly understandable that it had to be altered so it could be made into a

movie. As someone already mentioned, he had an elliptical and indirect writing

style, but even he couldn't hide what Popeye was up to with that corncob.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No doubt Billy was an extremely talented writer, but he did tend to overlong

sentences and sometimes oblique syntax, though I've found it still worthwhile

to get through those four page long sentences. If I remember correctly, Sanctuary

is not as convoluted as some of his other novels.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the book years ago, and the story is filled with odd stuff that doesn't make a lot of sense in real life. It seems to have been written just to be salacious and vulgar, but as if some university "intellectual" were making it all up, trying to guess what low-class people did for fun. These types of paperback novels were usually sold for about 10? each at bus stations, train stations, and downtown news stands.

 

In the old days we had news stands in small and big cities that were like small stores, filled with the most recent newspapers from major cities (this was for travelers), mens magazines, and various adult type paperback books, also, tobacco products. Books like this were very commonly read by some adults (mainly men) during long bus and train trips (women read them at home after their husbands or boyfriends had finished reading them).

 

At bus and train stations, books like this would be sold at the snack bar, often on wire racks. These adult books could not be sold to anyone under 18 in most states.

 

AbeBooks dot com has a first edition hardback, in fine condition, selling for $18,500.

 

http://www.abebooks.com/book-search/title/sanctuary/author/faulkner/first-edition/sortby/1/

 

Here?s a cheap paperback version:

 

sanctuary.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, he was one of the more prominent pulp writers of the time, much admired of factory and construction workers who would pick up a copy of his latest release before hitting the bars. Let me see, I believe he was awarded the Nobel Prize for literature just two years before Mickey Spillane got his. . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Of course Faulkner was an alcoholic or at least pretty close to being one.

I don't know if he swore off booze while he was writing or not. I'm sure one

of the biographies would have that info. Maybe there could be some kind of

rating for how many drinks a reader would need to keep up with all the

structural meanderings in his books. One novel could be a one pot of corn

likker, a more complicated one two pots of corn likker, and so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well just about every Faulkner novel has odd stuff that doesn't, or seemingly

doesn't, make sense in real life, and might be considered salacious and vulgar

and beyond. Sanctuary does it in a relatively straightforward way. I don't know

the details of how the book was marketed, but I would guess that Faulkner

happened to hit it right, at least in terms of sales, this one time. I don't think

Faulkner even graduated from college, though he likely learned a lot on his own.

And he had enough experience of how poorer folks lived in that place and time

that he didn't need to fake it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
×
×
  • Create New...