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

Recommended Posts

Just now, ElCid said:

Now that's depressing.  I remember in late 50's took a trip through the Panhandle and Amarillo to go to visit an aunt in Sunray TX.  As best my memory recalls, very flat and very desolate.

It's not quite in the panhandle - it's a bit south and east of there, but the topography is similar.   It's just a bit south of Wichita Falls TX.  

Trees are in short supply in that part of the country.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, txfilmfan said:

It's not quite in the panhandle - it's a bit south and east of there, but the topography is similar.   It's just a bit south of Wichita Falls TX.  

Trees are in short supply in that part of the country.

I went through an Army training course in southern MS once and roomed with an Army veterinarian from OK.  He said if anyone asked him what he thought of southern MS, he would have to say he couldn't see anything for the trees - compared to OK.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ElCid said:

I went through an Army training course in southern MS once and roomed with an Army veterinarian from OK.  He said if anyone asked him what he thought of southern MS, he would have to say he couldn't see anything for the trees - compared to OK.

Depends on the part of OK.  The eastern side is hilly and forested - with commercial timber and national forests.  The western half looks just like that photo of Archer City/Anarene TX.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, ElCid said:

I went through an Army training course in southern MS once and roomed with an Army veterinarian from OK.  He said if anyone asked him what he thought of southern MS, he would have to say he couldn't see anything for the trees - compared to OK.

Cid, you might appreciate this story. I was once driving through the Texas hill country with a friend. Having grown up in the Southeast, I commented about how gray the landscape looked. My friend, who grew up in Roswell, NM, said she was just about to say how green it looked.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Moe Howard said:

Doesn’t he buy a large airplane propellor?  
 

Blow Up is usually associated with the night club scene where The Yardbirds perform, with both Jeff Beck AND Jimmy Page.  Great Stuff! A near riot ensues when they band smash up their equipment. Thomas escapes with the prize neck of Beck’s guitar which once he’s outside, he tosses away like trash. 

 

For those interested in rock history, The Who was the original band that Antonioni had in mind for the club scene - and considering their stage routine at the time, it's easy to see why. Their manager Kit Lambert made a rookie mistake though when he asked Yardbirds manager Simon Napier-Bell for negotiating advice. Napier-Bell told Lambert to hold out for more money and final cut approval, knowing full well that Antonioni would not agree. Napier-Bell then offered the services of his band for a very reasonable sum.  Those managers and promoters played cut-throat, man. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2021 at 10:20 PM, NickAndNora34 said:

@ everyone: I'm afraid to tell you all this, but I just watched Citizen Kane for the very first time last night, and I did not love it... There were certainly moments I enjoyed, but I think I hyped it up too much in my own brain, so when I finally watched it, I was underwhelmed. This film is certainly not without merit, though. I can see how it is widely regarded as one of the best films of all time. 

Why You Should Care About 'Citizen Kane' | by Richard Brownell | Medium

I didn't love it the first time I saw it, either. Or the second. I acquired the taste. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2021 at 10:25 PM, txfilmfan said:

I wonder whether Citizen Kane is really loved by many, or just appreciated for its technical merits?  

I love it, and I wonder if it's technical merits are all that noticeable today. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw Casablanca for the first time at one of the TCM screenings (in 2012, maybe?). At first, I recall only picking up on references - such as the map graphic, like the one in Raiders of the Lost Ark, or some of the famous lines. But I was soon drawn into the story. Came away thinking it was a fantastic movie and well-deserving of all the accolades. I’ve not seen it since, however, because of something I later read on this message board about director Michael Curtiz and horses used in the filming of The Charge of the Light Brigade. I know some will argue about separating art from the artist and there are times I can do that. In this case, however, I’ve just not been able to do so. But your mileage may vary, as the saying goes. 
 

I approached watching Citizen Kane for the first time with a mix of resignation and apprehension. How could I consider myself a fan of classic movies if I’d never seen what is often cited as the greatest American film of all time? But it seemed like a dull homework assignment and I wasn’t exactly looking forward to it.

How wrong my expectations were. I found it so entertaining, with surprising emotion and humor to go with the drama. A great, great film, though I can understand if some don’t care for it.

But I still can’t stand Gone with the Wind.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Calamity said:

... because of something I later read on this message board about director Michael Curtiz and horses used in the filming of The Charge of the Light Brigade

I knew nothing about this. Apparently, David Niven wrote about it in his memoirs and described it as a "carnage." I googled and found a detailed piece here by Alan Rode (who also I'd never heard of) that says the incident has been exaggerated. (Turns out the real carnage took place during the filming of the silent Ben-Hur, which involved the same second unit director, B. Reeves "Breezy" Eason.) Flynn complained to the ASPCA, and Warner employees went to court - incredibly, it seems, without conferring with Warners legal department -and pled guilty. Warner later retaliated:

The attending veterinarian, Warner Bros. employees, and other principals on the scene provided signed statements and sworn affidavits that attested to the nature of the injuries of the two horses that were put down, along with the third horse that subsequently died of heart failure. There was a fourth horse that was killed as a result of falling and striking a sharp rock during a scene filmed in Chatsworth. Unable to reverse the guilty pleas of its employees, Warner Bros. concentrated on correcting reports about the deaths of numerous horses. The studio successfully sued the Women’s Guild of Empire in Great Britain for libelous statements about the film that included a recommended boycott.

340 horses were used in all, and Warners records indicate the ASPCA investigator tried to extort money from employees before going to the press. The piece appears to be well-researched and the guy can write, anyway.

But if it were true I would definitely hold it against Curtiz and Eason. This would not be a case of separating the art from the artist. The art itself would be tainted. 

(Edit: I note that the wiki entry on this aspect of the film says 125 horses died and is unsourced.)

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

Where the Green Ants Dream (1984)

Intriguing. I was living in Melbourne in 1984 and never even heard of this movie. I did move back to the US eventually because of "culture shock" if you can believe that. The City was beautiful, like Victorian England- narrow old fashioned streets of beautiful buildings, trollies, quaintly dressed military guards at Memorial Gardens, etc.

But the racism/segregation was more than I could bear-Australia made America look evolved & equal. Although mixed heritage (isn't everyone?) was perceived as "white" and actually experienced:

  • Asians & black girls leave the communal "TV room" when I entered
  • Cashiers move me to the front of a line of "brown" people
  • Friends aghast that I walked through or patronized "native" neighborhoods & businesses
  • Being moved in a seat yourself restaurant to another section 

While there were no signs prohibiting anything "only", it felt like America of the 50's. So I'm not surprised a movie was made of this kind of story. Americans I know who have gone to Melbourne College have told me it's better, but how much do you really see from school?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Calamity said:

I saw Casablanca for the first time at one of the TCM screenings (in 2012, maybe?). At first, I recall only picking up on references - such as the map graphic, like the one in Raiders of the Lost Ark, or some of the famous lines. But I was soon drawn into the story. Came away thinking it was a fantastic movie and well-deserving of all the accolades. I’ve not seen it since, however, because of something I later read on this message board about director Michael Curtiz and horses used in the filming of The Charge of the Light Brigade. I know some will argue about separating art from the artist and there are times I can do that. In this case, however, I’ve just not been able to do so. But your mileage may vary, as the saying goes. 
 

 

If you're turning your back on all Michael Curtiz films because of the horse incident you're missing out on some of the best films of the Hollywood studio system days.

vp-article_d16337a7-962c-57ca-8588-6cea5

The_Adventures_of_Robin_Hood-698356122-l

breaking.gif

seahawk_01.jpg

yankeedoodle.jpg?itok=A9ngrifn

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

OIP.YProjodIrSvRcH81C_vnDAHaLH?pid=ImgDe

I watched MONA LISA (1986) for the first time last night.

there may be spoilers,

it was not what I was expecting...it was not any one thing, it seems to be any number of movies within any given five minutes of its run-time.

Neo noir, proto-PRETTY WOMAN, romantic comedy, TAXI DRIVER, HARDCORE (the GEORGE C. SCOTT movie), then back to PRETTY WOMAN, then BRIGHTON ROCK, then a DE PALMA FILM, then AN ENTIRE PHIL COLLINS/GENESIS POWER BALLAD PLAYS OVER A MONTAGE OF PEEP SHOWS (????!!!!!) AND I STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT THE **** TO MAKE OF THAT PART, then it's TRAINSPOTTING, it even flirts briefly with becoming NUNS ON THE RUN thanks to a serious of increasingly curious bits with ROBBIE COLTRANE, and then it ultimately settles on being OUT OF THE PAST before throwing us a curve and ending as MY TWO DADS.

Someone needed to take this movie out to a nice lunch and have a talk with it about what exactly the Hell kind of STORY it wanted to BE.

On one thing, there is no ambiguity- BOB HOSKINS is AMAZING in it, it is a TOUR-DE-FORCE, reminded me a lot of BETTE DAVIS in DANGEROUS- where the film isn't so much a film in its own right, it's a REEL for ITS STAR- having them play all the emotions from A to Z- and it's the same with HOSKINS here. Whatever the movie decides to be at that minute, he is up for it. there are scenes where he is literally QUIVERING with EMOTION and you can see how REAL it is.

He gives his ALL.

MICHAEL CAINE is also in it as a SADISTIC PIMP, and he is very good, but there is an unforgiveably bad sequence late in the film where HOSKINS rescues a girl from his clutches that I don't buy for a minute.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, LuckyDan said:

I knew nothing about this. Apparently, David Niven wrote about it in his memoirs and described it as a "carnage." I googled and found a detailed piece here by Alan Rode (who also I'd never heard of) that says the incident has been exaggerated. (Turns out the real carnage took place during the filming of the silent Ben-Hur, which involved the same second unit director, B. Reeves "Breezy" Eason.) Flynn complained to the ASPCA, and Warner employees went to court - incredibly, it seems, without conferring with Warners legal department -and pled guilty. Warner later retaliated:

The attending veterinarian, Warner Bros. employees, and other principals on the scene provided signed statements and sworn affidavits that attested to the nature of the injuries of the two horses that were put down, along with the third horse that subsequently died of heart failure. There was a fourth horse that was killed as a result of falling and striking a sharp rock during a scene filmed in Chatsworth. Unable to reverse the guilty pleas of its employees, Warner Bros. concentrated on correcting reports about the deaths of numerous horses. The studio successfully sued the Women’s Guild of Empire in Great Britain for libelous statements about the film that included a recommended boycott.

340 horses were used in all, and Warners records indicate the ASPCA investigator tried to extort money from employees before going to the press. The piece appears to be well-researched and the guy can write, anyway.

But if it were true I would definitely hold it against Curtiz and Eason. This would not be a case of separating the art from the artist. The art itself would be tainted. 

(Edit: I note that the wiki entry on this aspect of the film says 125 horses died and is unsourced.)

IN RE: CHARGE OF THE LIGHT BRIGADE (1936)

Unfortunate facts about the filming aside, LIGHT BRIGADE is still a surprisingly resonant film and, when i have rewatched parts of it within the last couple of years, I'm always shocked by how VIOLENT it is, in fact, I think it's the most violent film of the 1930s, even moreso than SCARFACE.

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

IN RE: CHARGE OF THE LIGHT BRIGADE (1936)

Unfortunate facts about the filming aside, LIGHT BRIGADE is still a surprisingly resonant film and, when i have rewatched parts of it within the last couple of years, I'm always shocked by how VIOLENT it is, in fact, I think it's the most violent film of the 1930s, even moreso than SCARFACE.

Perhaps apropos, it was huge in Japan.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Charge of the Light Brigade has its share of violence and it is disturbing when you see the horses going down with the use of the "running W" wire in the film's climax, knowing that many of the animals were put down afterwards as a result of their broken legs. It was dangerous for the stunt riders, as well, but at least they, unlike the horses, knew in advance they had to leap from their saddles.

Having said that, though, I'm hard pressed to think that the violence of this code era film is any more graphic than that to be found in many other action films of the time.

G Men (1935), with its explosive FBI raid on a gangland hideout, made far more of an impression upon me for its violence, for example, along with Hawks' Scarface (1932). A later adventure film of the decade, The Real Glory (1939), an action adventure dealing with a Moro uprising in the Philippines, is noteworthy for its surprisingly (for its time) graphic violence, which includes a replica of a head on the ground of one of its cast members after he is buried alive in an ant colony.

Mike Curtiz was not known for his concern for others when it came to making a good film. His first big production in Hollywood, Noah's Ark, has a flood sequence in which legend has it a few extras were drowned. When Curtiz was told, before the watery flood gates opened, that some extras could be in danger his reply was reputedly, "They'll have to look out for themselves." Studio power at the time was such that, if there actually were deaths because of lax safety precautions, no charges were ever laid.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Gulager wrote and directed a short avante-garde short film in '69 called A DAY WITH THE BOYS that had a surprise ending.  I think his son was part of the cast.  I saw it(of course) as an in between movies filler at a local drive-in.  

https://youtu.be/imMJrTnGZZk

Sepiatone

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Fedya said:

Read my review back on page 462 of this thread.

With due respect it wasn't much of a review. You cherry picked a scene or two and then ridiculed it There is more to it than that, assuredly. But no matter, you didn't like it, so be it.  My point was that though it's not always necessary to explain oneself, it's good form to do so rather than simply declare a cursory and vitriolic dismissal ... IMO. But your review may be looked at as an "impressionistic" judgement, i.e., "I'm not going to go  into it, but I don't like this film." An interpretation, maybe.

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

Intriguing. I was living in Melbourne in 1984 and never even heard of this movie. I did move back to the US eventually because of "culture shock" if you can believe that. The City was beautiful, like Victorian England- narrow old fashioned streets of beautiful buildings, trollies, quaintly dressed military guards at Memorial Gardens, etc.

But the racism/segregation was more than I could bear-Australia made America look evolved & equal. Although mixed heritage (isn't everyone?) was perceived as "white" and actually experienced:

  • Asians & black girls leave the communal "TV room" when I entered
  • Cashiers move me to the front of a line of "brown" people
  • Friends aghast that I walked through or patronized "native" neighborhoods & businesses
  • Being moved in a seat yourself restaurant to another section 

While there were no signs prohibiting anything "only", it felt like America of the 50's. So I'm not surprised a movie was made of this kind of story. Americans I know who have gone to Melbourne College have told me it's better, but how much do you really see from school?

I feel this movie conveys well the "we do not need to put up signs to know which people belong where" mentality. The messages of Herzog's images are often subtle but they are present at all times. The aborigines in their native environment wear motley cast-offs of the Western world. They are in the city swaddled in formal business suits so that they might not contaminate the environment. It is a quite compelling juxtaposition to see a man who is tailored to modern sophistication from the neck down and a venerable part of an ancient culture from the neck up.

It is common for movies with such themes to pander to the non-Western culture. Herzog presents them equally. It is common also to portray such situations through the lens of Western culture. Herzog avoided this to some extent by choosing Aboriginal land rights activists to play major characters and provide input on their roles.

I believe that it is impossible to analyze the prejudices of a region from within an enclave such as university or military or religious order. The people therein have a pivotal interest which overrides most personal prejudices. It blinds them also to all but the most egregious examples of prejudice in the surrounding community which supports the enclave.

My mixed heritage is that I am White Russian on my mother's side and Cossack on my father's side. This means that I can be aristocratically beautiful one moment and look as if I am a barely-restrained barbarian the next moment. 😉 I have rarely been discriminated against because of this but I have had my fitness for particular duty questioned because of supposed crimes allegedly committed by my paternal great-grandfathers by people who see those of my ethnic heritage as uncivilized murderers. Sergei M. Eisenstein has much to answer to in this regard.

I have experienced prejudice against me because my reproductive organs are on the inside rather than exposed for all the world to see. This is quite common in most present cultures. It has been  exacerbated in my case because I have often had assigned superiors who were lesser in intelligence and education and their only claim to their position is that they can helicopter their privates. The situation often becomes critical because I do not suffer fools gladly. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Carnival Story (1954)

About a small time roving carnival, in Germany because it can't make a profit in America, Carnival Story may have a familiar romantic triangle plot but remains strangely compelling, even if the final results are decidedly uneven. Produced on a limited budget by the King Brothers, the film's European location shooting brings some authentic atmosphere to the production.

Anne Baxter plays a destitute girl at the carnival who pick pockets barker Steve Cochran. He catches her but seems a nice enough sort and helps her get a job as dish washer. Soon they are having an affair. High dive artist Lyle Bettger then takes an interest in her and decides to take her on as part of his high dive act, with Baxter soon learning how to dive into pools from 200 feet. But Bettger gets romantically interested in Anne, as well, setting himself up for potential conflict with Cochran.

3868-3.jpg

There is a major plot twist I didn't see coming at about the three quarter mark of this drama which becomes exceedingly melodramatic (rather enjoyably) at the end. Jay C. Flippen is cast as the carnival manager, with George Nader as a photographer friend of Bettger's.

Baxter is quite effective in this drama as she comes to hate herself for getting sucked into a love-hate relationship with a no good, while Cochran is perfectly cast in his role as a "nice" guy who turns increasingly into a heel as the film progresses. Bettger, usually cast as a screen baddie, including his insanely jealous portrayal in De Mille's Greatest Show on Earth two years before, surprisingly plays a decent guy here.

Modest little film lacking the studio slickness of the De Mille production, the tortured emotions of Baxter's portrayal (combined with Cochran's louse performance) bring this film an interest of its own.

1b7800398ed4795510fe449f4679b7a6.jpg

2.5 out of 4

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

I will say that even though I don’t like Oscar month, I can tell they’ve really put some effort into the lineup this year. There’s actually been a handful of things I’ve taken a peak at. 

A few "recent" movies too, like Nebraska, last night.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TomJH said:

Carnival Story (1954)

About a small time roving carnival, in Germany because it can't make a profit in America, Carnival Story may have a familiar romantic triangle plot but remains strangely compelling, even if the final results are decidedly uneven. Produced on a limited budget by the King Brothers, the film's European location shooting brings some authentic atmosphere to the production.

Anne Baxter plays a destitute girl at the carnival who pick pockets barker Steve Cochran. He catches her but seems a nice enough sort and helps her get a job as dish washer. Soon they are having an affair. High dive artist Lyle Bettger then takes an interest in her and decides to take her on as part of his high dive act, with Baxter soon learning how to dive into pools from 200 feet. But Bettger gets romantically interested in Anne, as well, setting himself up for potential conflict with Cochran.

3868-3.jpg

There is a major plot twist I didn't see coming at about the three quarter mark of this drama which becomes exceedingly melodramatic (rather enjoyably) at the end. Jay C. Flippen is cast as the carnival manager, with George Nader as a photographer friend of Bettger's.

Baxter is quite effective in this drama as she comes to hate herself for getting sucked into a love-hate relationship with a no good, while Cochran is perfectly cast in his role as a "nice" guy who turns increasingly into a heel as the film progresses. Bettger, usually cast as a screen baddie, including his insanely jealous portrayal in De Mille's Greatest Show on Earth two years before, surprisingly plays a decent guy here.

Modest little film lacking the studio slickness of the De Mille production, the tortured emotions of Baxter's portrayal (combined with Cochran's louse performance) bring this film an interest of its own.

1b7800398ed4795510fe449f4679b7a6.jpg

2.5 out of 4

I've never seen this film. Does TCM ever show it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hibi said:

A few "recent" movies too, like Nebraska, last night.

I saw a few minutes of Nebraska last night, enough for me to order it promptly from the local library. I kept thinking that most of the characters in the film must be related to me. Is Nebraska actually part of the South?

Choice morsel: A good ole boy is trying to make pleasant conversation with a stranger. "What kind of car you drive?" When this topic quickly dies: "What kind of car does your brother drive?"

  • Haha 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...