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

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, LuckyDan said:

Okay, I've got one. Here are 1000 words on, appropriately, The Other Side of the Wind.

Hope you don't mind, I responded to excerpts of your review  in RED- LHF

When I pressed play I found the Netflix account was set up with subtitles activated. While reaching for the remote to turn them off I decided they might actually be helpful. They were. Without them, much of the off-camera chatter and mumble (and not a little of the on-camera chatter and mumble) would have been lost to me.

I always watch EVERYTHING with subtitles. I am religious about subtitles. I don't know exactly WHY this is- maybe it's the aspiring screenwriter in me, but I recommend everyone always watch everything with SUBTITLES. (Also, every now and then, subtitles/closed captioning can result in some unintentional hilarity)


John Huston plays Jake Hannaford, a 70-year-old director who is throwing a party to raise money to finish his work in progress,  The first thing we learn about Jake is that he is dead, and there is an open question as to whether his death was the result of an accident (plausible) or a suicide (also plausible).

so, is it an outright mystery? or more of a MRS DALLOWAY kind of thing? I'm also somewhat reminded of the late 70's mystery film THE LAST OF SHEILA by your synopsis.

This approach to story telling means we see different film from different cameras with different audio, mostly in black and white, all interspersed with Jake's vivid and unedited color footage,

A touch of RASHOMAN?

 there is a lot of skin in a few parts, especially the opening. Wait till the kids go to bed. 

Your review is excellent, but I hope you don't mind my one critique: you buried the lede. the FIRST THING you can say that will get ANYONE interested in ANYTHING is "there is tons of nudity in this." like, you could have made the whole review "this thing has A LOT OF NUDITY" and I can practically hear everyone scampering off to open up their Netflix.

also, in re: THIS PHOTO, "DAMN, I didn't know FRESCA has been around since the 1970s!!!!!!"

the-other-side-of-the-wind.jpg

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On CNN's webpage (under Paid Content),   is:    The Worst Movie Remakes of All Time, with this photo:

[Gallery] The Worst Movie Remakes of All Time

While the High Society "remake" of The Philadelphia Story is inferior to the original,   no firm with the music scene with Louie Armstrong and Bing can be among the worst of all time.

(I didn't check out the other films since these "paid content" links are bogus,  taking one to mostly ads,  ads,  ads,  and very little content). 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/23/2021 at 7:42 AM, LornaHansonForbes said:

 When the names are read,  for some reason they show a picture of Martin Scorsese instead of O’Keefe!

Kind of reminds me of this Oscar moment from the 1976 Oscars (for the 1975 films) where Ronee blakeley is shown, and then the cameraman keeps the nominee cam on Susan Sarandon instead!

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CinemaInternational said:

Kind of reminds me of this Oscar moment from the 1976 Oscars (for the 1975 films) where Ronee blakeley is shown, and then the cameraman keeps the nominee cam on Susan Sarandon instead!

 

I thought the SAME THING!!!!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

And on that note, I have been watching CALL ME BY YOUR NAME (2018?) in 10 minute installments over the last 5 days, ducking out every time the languid pretension gets unbearable and i don't think I am going to be able to finish it.

it sucks.

interestingly enough, as I have been watching it THIS DELICIOUSLY SALACIOUS news about ARMIE HAMMER has broken.

[ he is also, I note, a terrible terrible actor.]

I never saw the film. I remember it being ballyhooed to the 9s on a previous site I was on (and, much to my surprise, I am on again) about how it was one of the best films of the decade, and there was something about the idea of the main character being underage (only 17 )and drawn into a relationship with somebody older (albeit not much older) that left me uncomfortable. (Kind of the same uncomfortable feeling I had with some films in the 80s with couplings between teens and adults) (Even so, I am glad that James Ivory is finally an Oscar winner)  If I see a mass wave of critical hype going for some new film, I know that for the most part I am likely going to end up being frustrated by it. It makes me want to cue the Peggy Lee song "Is That All There Is".

By the way, Hammer just sounds like a baking soda, toothpaste, and kitty litter company (which I gather he is related to in some way). I have head those rumors too and they are something.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to be Somerset Maugham day (yay).  I just watched the Greta Garbo version of  The Painted Veil.  The2006 version with Naomi Watts and Edward Norton is one of my favorite films so I was very interested in this version.  The plot varied a good bit, particularly the ending but this, older, version was still well  worth watching.  Garbo sometimes bores me, but she came alive in this one, alternately more joyful and sadder  than I had ever seen her.  I thought  Liev Schreiber  was a much better cad than George Brent.  I missed his two-toned shoes.

Of Human Bondage Comes on at 6 but it's the Eleanor Parker version and  I only like the1934  Bette Davis version.  Why would anyone think they could top that?

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, AndreaDoria said:

It seems to be Somerset Maugham day (yay).  I just watched the Greta Garbo version of  The Painted Veil.  The2006 version with Naomi Watts and Edward Norton is one of my favorite films so I was very interested in this version.  The plot varied a good bit, particularly the ending but this, older, version was still well  worth watching.  Garbo sometimes bores me, but she came alive in this one, alternately more joyful and sadder  than I had ever seen her.  I thought  Liev Schreiber  was a much better cad than George Brent.  I missed his two-toned shoes.

Of Human Bondage Comes on at 6 but it's the Eleanor Parker version and  I only like the1934  Bette Davis version.  Why would anyone think they could top that?

 

Since Bette Davis and Leslie Howard are my favorite actors,   of course I favor the 1934 version of Of Human Bondage.    But when someone makes a film it isn't a question of them thinking they could top any prior versions.   Warners had already paid for the rights to the story.     WB was trying to make Paul Henreid into a bigger star.   The lead actresses,  Parker and Smith,  were under contract.   They were getting paid weekly, regardless of if they worked or not.      That explains why WB decided to make another version.

PS:  and it paid off finally for WB when they made the 3rd version of The Maltese Falcon.     Jack may have been trying to make something similar happen yet again. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, TikiSoo said:

I thank you for your insightful impressions. I have this on "my list" but just haven't gathered up the energy for it yet. Good to know there's some comedic moments in it.  I'm currently wallowing in lighthearted  pre-codes & screwball comedies trying to keep myself out of depression.

I'm prone to seasonal bouts with the blues myself, so if the screwballs are working for you, stick with them. I don't think you will see anything in The Other Side of the Wind though that would set you back. Take a look when you're ready. I'd love to hear what you think.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Vidor said:

The worst remake of all time was the Gus Van Sant "Psycho".

Yes, it was even WORSE than the cool-teen (and UA out-of-copyright) remake of "Rollerball".   And that's saying something.

hqdefault.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

 

LHF: Hope you don't mind, I responded to excerpts of your review  in RED

LD: I don't mind. I'm simply wild about red. I'm more a candy apple or deep burgundy guy, but my den is red. A favorite guitar is red. My favorite bike as a kid was red. Why if you cut me ... (I don't see a text coloring option or I'd use it. How did you do that?)

LHF: I always watch EVERYTHING with subtitles. I am religious about subtitles. I don't know exactly WHY this is- maybe it's the aspiring screenwriter in me, but I recommend everyone always watch everything with SUBTITLES. (Also, every now and then, subtitles/closed captioning can result in some unintentional hilarity)

LD: I can see that you may have a gift for natural dialogue. I'd be interested in reading some of your work. The subtitles were a happy accident. My wife uses the Netflix account and she enjoys watching Korean dramas and romantic comedies, so it defaulted to the titles. I stick pretty much to the over-the-air classic sitcom channels. 

Speaking of. You know who else loved classic sitcoms? Orson Welles. Mm hmm. He was particularly fond of "The Dick Van Dyke Show." In fact, one of the sets he used for Wind was the set of "The New Dick Van Dyke Show."

But yeah, when I cranked up the movie, there were the subtitles. I found there were moments when my ears didn't detect the dialogue I read, and then I sometimes heard the actors speak but I doubt I would have understood what they were saying if not for the titles. There has been great improvement from the old days of phonetic misspellings and that ugly distracting type in the black boxes. 

LHF: so, is it an outright mystery? or more of a MRS DALLOWAY kind of thing? I'm also somewhat reminded of the late 70's mystery film THE LAST OF SHEILA by your synopsis.

Not a mystery per se, no. We are invited to draw our own conclusion, but there is no answer, and it isn't the point. Jake is simply gone. What do we think of him? That seems to be the question.

LHF: A touch of RASHOMAN?

LD: I don't know Rashoman but after pulling up Mr. Wiki and my eyes falling on the first line of the second paragraph, I would ask the Rashoman guy, "A Touch of Kane?"

But you give me a chance to talk about the one mental note I made that I did not include in my review. Bava. The colors Orson chose for the club scene in the movie-within-the-movie are bold primaries against black. Chiaroscuro. Bava and "all the colors of the dark."

But since I don't think Orson meant that, and because I couldn't find a way to squeeze it in without sounding like an "I know Bava" film dork, I skipped it. (Edit: Adding it here makes me a wannabe film dork, doesn't it?)

LHF: Your review is excellent, but I hope you don't mind my one critique: you buried the lede. the FIRST THING you can say that will get ANYONE interested in ANYTHING is "there is tons of nudity in this." like, you could have made the whole review "this thing has A LOT OF NUDITY" and I can practically hear everyone scampering off to open up their Netflix.

LD: I could rhapsodize about Oja's beauty in the proper venue. She is something to see. But even writing that, I anticipate reactions like, "Thing?!  You sexist pig!" I can't relate to today's sensibilities. And I don't want to. When the movie started, I noted Netflix's disclaimers of "Language. Nudity. Smoking." And I thought ... Smoking? Are you. Forking. Kidding me!? Is somebody's allergy going to be triggered at the sight of John Huston firing up a cigar? 

Oja (pronounced OY-uh) is the pseudonym given to The Actress by Orson and we can imagine him in his middle life meeting this young lady and thinking, "ohh yeahhh." She is quite something to see and there is much of her to admire here. I simply considered my audience and opted to take the subtle route in describing her scenes. I think I was quite artful, really.

LHF: also, in re: THIS PHOTO, "DAMN, I didn't know FRESCA has been around since the 1970s!!!!!!"
LD: Fresca in the late 60s was a player in the soda wars. Their ads featured blizzards as I recall. I remember a joke that went, "Did you hear about the Aggie that drank a case of Fresca? He snowed in his pants." 

Addendum

Let me add here my first second thought about the movie. I said in my review that I thought Jake was worthy of our sympathy. Now I'm wondering if he wasn't simply a self-indulgent man who found himself presented with a bill he couldn't pay. And yes, I'm thinking too about Orson. Did he bring it all on himself? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

I always watch EVERYTHING with subtitles. I am religious about subtitles. I don't know exactly WHY this is- maybe it's the aspiring screenwriter in me, but I recommend everyone always watch everything with SUBTITLES. (Also, every now and then, subtitles/closed captioning can result in some unintentional hilarity)

Lorna, I suggest you try to stop "reading" movies whenever possible. It's a crutch teenagers use, although it helped me guide TikiKid into watching silents! But you can easily lose your good language skills by not carefully listening & processing words/sentences/meanings, it's a different brain skill.

That said, it's sometimes necessary, I understand this film in particular has sound clarity issues.

3 hours ago, LuckyDan said:

Not a mystery per se, no. We are invited to draw our own conclusion, but there is no answer, and it isn't the point. Jake is simply gone. What do we think of him? That seems to be the question.

This synopsis reminds me very much of what's best about THE BAD & THE BEAUTIFUL '52.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TikiSoo said:

Lorna, I suggest you try to stop "reading" movies whenever possible. It's a crutch teenagers use, although it helped me guide TikiKid into watching silents! But you can easily lose your good language skills by not carefully listening & processing words/sentences/meanings, it's a different brain skill.

That said, it's sometimes necessary, I understand this film in particular has sound clarity issues.

 

???   Reading is a CRUTCH for teenagers?   I wouldn't think so unless it's involving texts, tweets or any other such lamebrain activity on their phones.  But MOVIES?  I've never known any teens interested in any movie they'd have to read.  Especially SILENTS which are also in (gasp!) Black & White!  :o

;) Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

I always watch EVERYTHING with subtitles. I am religious about subtitles. I don't know exactly WHY this is- maybe it's the aspiring screenwriter in me, but I recommend everyone always watch everything with SUBTITLES. (Also, every now and then, subtitles/closed captioning can result in some unintentional hilarity)

It's never my right or duty to weigh in with writerly advice, and I'm a firm believer in Kipling's "There are nine and sixty ways of constructing tribal lays, and every single one of them is right!" That said, and keeping in mind that my forte is short stories, not screenplays, I don't think you're doing yourself any favors by always reading subtitles.

The written word is distinctly different from the spoken word. When creating text, you have to have an eye for whitespace, deliberate imbalance of paragraph lengths, and a hundred other visual clues to provoke interest (or, at least, to avoid looking boring). Good word flow is important because most people read stories aloud in their head, but because the words aren't actually spoken, the writer of text can (occasionally) slip in things like "The sixth sick sheik's sixth sheep's sick" without making the reader stumble, taking them out of the story. 

The spoken word is both bulletproof and more delicate. It doesn't matter how it looks on the page. Instructions on pronunciation and aspect can be straightforward, totally inelegant, because the audience never sees them. Even, somewhat rhythmic, flow from word to word is paramount within each character's dialogue but must be deliberately interrupted when another character speaks to enhance the distinction between them. Tongue-twisters are right out!

The exact opposite of your advice is usually helpful. Rather than reading often inaccurate transcripts of spoken dialogue, writers are sometimes told to read their text aloud because that gives them a better sense of how the words flow. 

I must caution you, however, that this practice can be a little dangerous. To pass the time when in the hospital, I was working through a particularly difficult scene. A nurse walked into the room while I was having an argument with a dragon. I told her I'm a writer, and showed her my notepad and everything, but she still insisted on checking my list of medications.

 

  • Thanks 3
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Fire Over Africa (1954)

One of those routine programmers shot in an exotic location that can be fun to watch if you park your brain and don't expect too much.

A British production, partially shot at Spanish locations substituting for Africa, with interiors done in Shepperton Studios in London, it involves a search for the syndicate behind a dope smuggling operation in Tangiers (all you really need to know about the plot), with Maureen O'Hara as an American undercover agent who tangles with various creepy types, as well as Macdonald Carey as a character who keeps popping up making with the (not so) wise cracks and coming on to her a lot. O'Hara is the kind of undercover agent who draws attention from everyone in the city with her glowing complexion, fiery long red hair and array of bright flashy dresses. Binnie Barnes plays the owner of a club/bar.

My favourite moment in the film is probably when O'Hara first walks into a night club in the city. All eyes, both male and female, are upon her (it's amusing when a row of prostitutes sitting on bar stools all turn in unison to look at her). But tops is a dialogue exchange between two English males when they sight Maureen.

"My word."

"Yes indeed"

"Healthy type."

Very English indeed.

8611813%5D&call=url%5Bfile:product.chain

2 out of 4

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not realize people were so passionate on the topic:  “subtitles, yay or nay.”

i was in a bad accident today (don’t worry [or be too delighted] I’m all right)


When I get the chance I will elaborate further on my devotion to subtitles (I’m a strong “yay.”)

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Since Bette Davis and Leslie Howard are my favorite actors,   of course I favor the 1934 version of Of Human Bondage.    But when someone makes a film it isn't a question of them thinking they could top any prior versions.   Warners had already paid for the rights to the story.     WB was trying to make Paul Henreid into a bigger star.   The lead actresses,  Parker and Smith,  were under contract.   They were getting paid weekly, regardless of if they worked or not.      That explains why WB decided to make another version.

 

Surely all that  could have been achieved by putting those actors in a film that hadn't already  been done so well just 12 years earlier.  There are thousands of scripts and even more great novels that haven't been adapted to the screen.  By doing this remake they not only lost potential audience who didn't care to see a story they already knew, they invited negative comparisons for those new actors they were hoping to promote. Eleanor Parker, in particular,  was wrong for this part.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, AndreaDoria said:

Surely all that  could have been achieved by putting those actors in a film that hadn't already  been done so well just 12 years earlier.  There are thousands of scripts and even more great novels that haven't been adapted to the screen.  By doing this remake they not only lost potential audience who didn't care to see a story they already knew, they invited negative comparisons for those new actors they were hoping to promote. Eleanor Parker, in particular,  was wrong for this part.

I agree.   Sorry if it looked like I implied Jack Warner and producer Henry Blanke,   made a good decision.   Jack made this because he was cheap!  It was easy to make within the WB studio system,  using all contract actors and never having to leave Studio-City CA.

I watched parts of it last night just to confirm how misguided (at best), this production is.    I really love Eleanor Parker but,  as noted,  she was so wrong for the part of Mildred.   For me WB actor Patric Knowles gives the best performance,  and that says something.          Yes,  the film did poorly at the box office.    

I guess my overall point was that just because Bette Davis gave one of the best performances by any actress in the original,  doesn't mean, per se,  that one shouldn't  attempt a new adaptation.    E.g.   Bordertown is a good film with Davis and Paul Muni (ok,  playing another colorful character),   but only 5 years later the same WB studio system made They Drive by Night with newcomer-to-WB Ida Lupino and this really propelled Ida's career,  it what I believe is a better film (Bogie and Sheridan have a lot to do with that also).       I assume Jack was hoping to strike gold yet again (with Parker who was also new to the studio, as well as Smith),,,,  but yea,  no gold there,,, only rock and dirt.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/25/2021 at 6:12 AM, LornaHansonForbes said:

And on that note, I have been watching CALL ME BY YOUR NAME (2018?) in 10 minute installments over the last 5 days, ducking out every time the languid pretension gets unbearable and i don't think I am going to be able to finish it.

it sucks.

interestingly enough, as I have been watching it THIS DELICIOUSLY SALACIOUS news about ARMIE HAMMER has broken.

[ he is also, I note, a terrible terrible actor.]

When we saw this movie in the theater, it went on so long--especially the whole agonizing section where the needs-to-be-gay guy gets it on with a SECOND girlfriend--that I thought, "If the kid doesn't get around to making it with another guy, this audience of AARP-eligible gay men will attack the box office and demand their money back!"I liked the movie better than you did, but it could and should have been trimmed.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

???   Reading is a CRUTCH for teenagers?   I wouldn't think so unless it's involving texts, tweets or any other such lamebrain activity on their phones.  But MOVIES?

You may notice teens often watch movies with close captioning on. I don't know why or when this happened until I saw TikiKid doing it maybe a decade ago. Hearing the spoken word uses a completely different part of the brain to comprehend than the eyes reading the same dialogue. It's better to leave your eyes to "read" visual cues and for your brain to digest the dialogue by actively listening. It's one of the reasons music/sound is so important in film.

I did exploit TkiKid's tendency to "read" close captions by inviting her to attend silent film festivals with me. I was thrilled she became a big Louise Brooks fan just like me at her age.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Der Verlorene aka The Lost Man (1951)

der-verlorene-german-movie-poster%2Bnew.jpg

Turns out like Charles Laughton,  Peter Lorre also directed one Film Noir.

Directed by Peter Lorre.  Based on a novel by Peter Lorre screenplay was by Axel Eggebrecht, Helmut Käutner, Peter Lorre and Benno Vigny. Cinematography was by Václav Vích, Music by Willy Schmidt-Gentner. The  film stars Peter Lorre as Dr. Karl Rothe, aka Dr. Karl Neumeister, Karl John as Hösch, aka Nowak, Helmuth Rudolph as Colonel Winkler, Johanna Hofer as Frau Hermann, Renate Mannhardt as Inge Hermann, Eva Ingeborg Scholz asUrsula Weber, Lotte Rausch as Woman on Train, Gisela Trowe as Prostitute, Hansi Wendler as the Secretary. 


This story is told in a series of flashbacks. Dr Rothe is a kindly German doctor caring for refugees and displaced persons in a relocation camp after the war. When Hösch his former assistant is brought to the camp he triggers the flashbacks.  In reality he is Dr. Karl Neumeister who was a scientist doing bacteriological research to help the Nazi war effort during WWII. 

Lorre has some great closeups, his puss twitching grotesquely in this depicting his conflicting emotions and tortured mental illness. Václav Vích's  cinematography is both nightmarish and dream like. A reviewer below sums the film up pretty well.

Classic film noir by an unexpected master

"After years of dreary labor in Hollywood as a professional "evil foreigner," Lorre went home to Germany to write, direct and star in this dark, dreamlike narrative in which he plays the ultimate Peter Lorre character: a Nazi mad doctor sex murderer. The film is an ironic commentary by Lorre, the reluctant impersonator of psychopaths, on the nature of true psychopathology as embodied in the amoral Nazi regime. It's also an ingenious melding of the sort of B-film noir that Lorre had specialized in for years as an actor (Maltese Falcon, Stranger on the Third Floor, Quicksand) and the impressionistic Nouvelle Roman/Nouvelle Vague influenced art film just picking up steam on the continent (shades of Orpheus, Wild Strawberries, and Last Year at Marienbad can be seen in its shadowy enfolding of past/present and dream/reality.) Though somewhat uncertain in balancing himself between his roles as principal actor and director (the motivations of some of the other characters are somewhat murky, for instance, and it's rather a shock to see Peter Lorre so continually being the object of women's lustful attentions) this was clearly a man with the makings of an ingenious and original filmmaker. It's a shame this film isn't better known, and that Lorre never got the chance to make another." (IMDb Anne_Sharp 27 December 1999)

8/10  Full review in Film Noir/Gangster pages.


 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, cigarjoe said:

After years of dreary labor in Hollywood as a professional "evil foreigner," Lorre went home to Germany to write, direct and star in this dark, dreamlike narrative in which he plays the ultimate Peter Lorre character: a Nazi mad doctor sex murderer. The film is an ironic commentary by Lorre, the reluctant impersonator of psychopaths, on the nature of true psychopathology as embodied in the amoral Nazi regime.

So Lorre went hope to play an evil native citizen.     Yea,  ironic.     

Thanks for the info,  since I wasn't aware Lorre ever did this.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, TikiSoo said:

You may notice teens often watch movies with close captioning on. I don't know why or when this happened until I saw TikiKid doing it maybe a decade ago. Hearing the spoken word uses a completely different part of the brain to comprehend than the eyes reading the same dialogue. It's better to leave your eyes to "read" visual cues and for your brain to digest the dialogue by actively listening. It's one of the reasons music/sound is so important in film.

I did exploit TkiKid's tendency to "read" close captions by inviting her to attend silent film festivals with me. I was thrilled she became a big Louise Brooks fan just like me at her age.

Actually, I never noticed that at all.  I more see teens watching TV and/or movies on their phones(OY!) and with earbuds pushed in their ears.  If not that, they're still "nosediving" into their phones while twiddling their thumbs( texting, etc.).   As for music in film....

I usually thank the silent era for that.  As the first era in movie history involved movies being shown soundless and with a theater pianist or organist providing music along with the movie presumably to help create the mood or atmosphere of the movie story due to the absence of film sound and dialogue .  And when sound technology for film came about, studio suits figured that audiences were so used to some form of music accompanying the movie that they'd easier accept a movie score to go along with them.  But, that's a guess.  ;) 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, cigarjoe said:

Der Verlorene aka The Lost Man (1951)

der-verlorene-german-movie-poster%2Bnew.jpg

Turns out like Charles Laughton,  Peter Lorre also directed one Film Noir.

nice to have you back after your long absence, CJ!

WHERE DID YOU SEE THIS FILM???!!!!

And thanks for letting us know about it!

I am fascinated by what life must've been like for post-WWII Germany, call me nuts, but I see something of a parallel between it and life in America, 2021.

If I had the slightest bit of knowledge on the subject, I WOULD LOVE to write a story about CHRISTMAS in GERMANY in 1950, when a divided family- torn apart by Nazism- reunites for the first time since the War to try and get on with life after having it derailed and shattered by violence and politics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Night of the Hunter Poster

Night Of The Hunter (1955) TCM On Demand 10/10

 

 Harry Powell, a murderous religious fanatic, seeks some stolen money that only two children know where it is hid.

One of my top ten films of all time. Many consider it a "noir" but I never felt that way about it. I think it more a Grimm's fairy tale come to life. Powell is the big bad wolf and Lillian Gish's character Miss Cooper is like Mother Goose. I have seen this countless times and I saw it just now with good sound system attached. It made me appreciate the sound and music much more. The chirping crickets and hooting owls have a great effect. I love the music in this, the gentle lullabies are soothing but still have some tension. Mitchum's rich baritone sounds great as he brings menace to the hymn "Leaning On The Everlasting Arms".

I would also recommend the Criterion DVD, it has some archived interviews with Mitchum, Gish and Shelley Winters. And we get to see Charles Laughton directing every scene in the film, a gold mine for film buffs, especially for fans of this film.

  • Like 1
Link to post
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
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...