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

Only now have I recovered enough to discuss this...


AddisonDeWitless
 Share

Recommended Posts

Bittersweet Love.

 

Did I hallucinate or was thing thing on yesterday at 6:00 PM as part of the Celeste Holme B-Day tribute: 197?, dir: David Miller, st: Lana Turner, Meredith Baxter (nee' Burney), Holme and...um, some people who I'm sure were on Murder, She Wrote years later.

 

plot: a married couple expecting a child discover that are *actually brother and sister.*

 

 

No Maltin review, this one is under even his standards.

 

 

It was *appaling trash.* BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADLY shot. I mean, some amatuer porn movies from the seventies looked less (or at least equally) amatuer. Bad framing, AAAAAAAAAAAAWFUL LIGHTING. I think the camera wobbled in some scenes, the stabilization was off in others, I'm sure I missed a few boom mic drops.

 

 

I mean, the guy who directed it was a BIG TIME HOLLYWOOD director (sorta) back in the day with a lot of credits to his name- among them Sudden Fear! and Captain Newman MD, this looked like some community theater BS.

 

 

I don't know, I don't want to spend too much time getting in to it if no one else saw it or if this thread- like the movie- dies an anonymous death as mankind decides to collectively shy away- but *if you saw this movie, please share what- if anything- you thought.*

 

 

Serious John Waters territory.

 

 

ps- Holme had the sh*ttiest role *ever.*

pss- Lana wore a caftan. And a head scarf and had three credits for make-up, hair and wardrobe.

psss- brother and sister, yeah.

pssss- thank you TCM for showing it though, it certainly captivated me...although I felt a real sense of shame when I was done watching it.

psssss- I'm hard to shame.

 

Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Apr 30, 2013 10:56 AM

 

Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Apr 30, 2013 10:59 AM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL, Addy, I wish I could say I watched it, but I forgot it was on. I noticed it on the schedule awhile ago, but then forgot about it. Not a movie I'd ever thought of winding up on TCM. So sorry I missed it. Sounds very entertaining!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a very low budget film, and it looked like a 16 mm print. Looks like it was shot in 16 mm with extensive use of zoom lenses, so they wouldn't have to take the time to move the camera in closer for the close-ups.

 

I thought the acting was pretty good.

 

I think the story line should NOT have been given away in the introduction and reviews of this film, because that ruins the total "surprize" of the announcement to the kids by their parents, that doesn't take place until at least an hour into the film.

 

Seems that the young couple met at college, fell in love, and got married, and were going to have a baby. They have different mothers, and one of the mothers finds out about it, and feels compelled to tell them that they both, by chance, have the same father. They are half-brother and half-sister, but they have different mothers.

 

The rest of the film was interesting, sad, tragic, since no one knew quite what to do about the baby. Would it be deformed? ****? And should the couple stay married? It was a sad ending for everyone. The young couple finally split up because the girl couldn't handle the situation after she was told about it.

 

However, the baby turned out fine, and overall, I thought all the acting in the film was pretty good and the screenplay was actually good too, and not too exploitive. It didn't present incest as a topic of discussion. That wasn't even an issue in the film. It mainly focused on the possible genetic problems of the baby and future children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

BITTERSWEET LOVE

 

 

HALF Brother and Sister (shared same father) !

 

 

Yes I saw it and yes you are right, It was Very Very badly shot, framing, lighting, etc., I could not believe it ! In fact, because of the bad lighting , I did not recognize Lana Turner at first.

 

 

The movie itself reminded me some what of PEYTON PLACE which also starred Lana Turner. Certainly Holme had no more then a walk-on role.

 

I too felt riveted to watch it to the end, Only to see if they would stay togehter or not, thank God they didn't!

 

Can't say I felt a sense of shame for watching it, after all, it was only a movie.

 

Twink

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I started a thread about this yesterday in the Films and Filmmakers forum. I agree with Fred that it was very well made. There were some moments of genuine tension-- first, about the baby, and then whether or not they would have sex again after they found out the truth.

 

They do not necessarily split up at the end. It is clearly ambiguous, with him going away to let her think and take care of the baby. But before he goes, he holds the baby and says he will be back. I really liked the scenes where she goes to Mexico for the abortion. This was a gutsy film and all the performers were up to the material.

 

Lana looked great and played a woman who caused the whole mess with years of secrets. I hope TCM replays it.

 

As for Maltin, his reviews after 1960 tend not to be included in the TCM database.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>Incest was the 'Main' issue, obviously !

 

 

I don't think so. The kids didn't know and didn't grow up together. The marriage wasn't annulled, the kids weren't forced to divorce. A couple of the adults didn't want them to stay married, but they made it clear their concern was about their future children.

 

The boy and girl didn't know each other until college. They didn't grow up together.

 

The film was mainly about possible genetic problems with the baby. The film was about a "medical technicality", not about close family members who grew up together getting married.

 

Seems that the young wife was the only one who thought of the other topic, but basically she didn't say much about it. She just felt differently about her husband because of her knowledge. But she did love and keep her baby, who seemed to be normal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you.

 

You KNOW Lana was **** when she saw the way the thing turned out. I think because of the director's credits, people assumed it was being shot professionally. And, yes, she was close to unrecognizable at times. And that wardrobe!

 

ps- did the UTTER LACK OF RESOLUTION to the story bother you? I know there were *a lot* of things wrong with this film, but that's a flaw that stands out to me as particularly egregious. Seriously: everything's hanging at the end: the status of the relationships between the husbands and wives and the parents and children...not even adequate final scenes or scenes that hinted they were final scenes for all involved....the scene with Holme visting the mother in the hospital ended at "no just me"; Lana's final shot was- I think- her working the caftan atop the staircase in some rented, vacant location, BADLY framed- vacant looks between her and the husband.

 

Some serious cocaine was going down somewhere behind the scenes on this thing. There's no way I would guess it was anything other than a first (and last) time directorial effort by someone who was blackmailing someone or working under the guidance of someone looking to produce a six-figure tax write off.

 

...or a TV movie.

 

Did this thing even get a release?

 

Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Apr 30, 2013 12:53 PM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The husband wanted to but the wife didn't want to. But he said he would be back. (Maybe for a sequel). :)

 

It is a basically yucky topic, in general, and the wife was yucked out by it. So were a couple of old folks.

 

But the film did concentrate very much on the possible physical problems of the baby and future children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is a myth about the South. Especially if our cousins are ugly. If they are good looking, well, we don't have to actually marry them. :)

 

Years ago I knew a married couple in San Francisco who were cousins. They were from Pennsylvania. Their mothers were sisters.

 

Occasionally their mothers would fly out to San Francisco together to visit them.

 

Their children turned out ok.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

> Sounds like what JEFF FOXWORTY'S "****" would call a "fun, family film". :)

>

> Sepiatone

>

No, whole other direction. They were trying for a bargain-basement Douglas Sirk kind of thing.

I truly hope Jon Waters has seen this movie some time in his life.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OMG..soo funnie', "Working the Caftan on the Staircase". :^0 ..I bet she was "****", imagine 'Thee' Lana Turner in such a Sh.... movie!

 

 

 

It did have a lot of potential and could have been 'almost' equal to Peyton Place...but you're right, everything from 'start to finish' was wrong about the movie except for the story line.

 

Twink

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it did get a release. Not much of one. I remember when it came out. One of those saturation bookings that played out in a week or two. (Drive Ins and Downtown theaters who booked low grade product)...

 

Poor Lana. I would like to see a night of Lana films from her later years on TCM. This, that movie where they try to OD her on LSD. WHat was that title? The Cube or something. And that cat title. Sheba, Baby? LOL. She starred in some doozies towards the end.............Doubt TCM would do it though (LOL) If only...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you think about the acting? I thought it was all pretty good.

 

And I think the screenwriter handled the subject delicately.

 

I suppose there is a 50,000,000 to 1 chance of this type of thing accidentally happening.

 

I think it happened more in the 19th Century, especially in small farming communities where there weren't a lot of different people to marry, and no one knew for sure if they were related or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=Hibi wrote:}{quote}Yes, it did get a release. Not much of one. *I remember when it came out.* One of those saturation bookings that played out in a week or two. (Drive Ins and Downtown theaters who booked low grade product)...

> *Get out.*

*For real?*

 

There is NOTHING related to it on youtube and only barebones entries on wiki and imdb. I mean, it's a film that deserved to fall between the cracks, but still...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>They didn't sleep together or have sex after they found out they were half brother and sister. That in it self tells you that incest was very much part of the movie...

 

Not yet. There is a scene after she has the baby where they spread out on the bed and kiss. It is a very passionate scene, but then she pushes him away when she remembers they are siblings. If he does come back, I think it is more than suggested that they will continue to have a physical relationship.

 

I really wanted to see a scene where Lana visits the baby. That was not shown (maybe it wound up on the cutting room floor). She was very adamant about pushing her daughter to abort the child, so I think it would have been very interesting if she actually had seen the infant that was her grandchild, on both sides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I remember it playing locally where I lived at the time. And I remember Variety reviewing it (I used to read it years ago) so it must've had a screening. I remember the Variety review wasnt that bad......I forget who released the film. I dont think it was a major outfit.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...