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

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, King Rat said:

About The Arrangement: Kazan was excited to do America America because it was based on his family's experience as Greeks in Turkey. He said he was through directing other people's stories and was only going to do original work of his own. The Arrangement suggests that this plan did not work out well.

I guess he changed his mind when he directed The Last Tycoon, another bomb, his last film.

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

Bulldog Drummond Escapes (1937)

Bulldog Drummond at Bay (1937)

Bulldog Drummond's Peril (1938)

 

A World War One veteran seeks danger and excitement and beautiful women to lift him out of the boredom of being just another English gentleman of independent means.

I recently discovered that: TubiTV has these and several more Bulldog Drummond movies. 

It is interesting to see the differences which Ray Milland, John Lodge and John Howard bring to the role. R. Milland is the most polished but his humor seems a bit forced. I had the impression that J. Lodge did not find the role comfortable. That his movie was the worst-written did not help. I found J. Howard to be the most believable as a man who would go through life as an undemanding bum if he were not wealthy and this seems to me to fit the concept of the character.

6.4/10   5.2/10   6.1/10

I am sorry to say that there is one Bulldog Drummond movie which I have never watched.  13 Lead Soldiers (1948) starring Tom Conway does not seem to be available anywhere.

 

I'll have to check these out.  Can't remember which ones, but the Drummond movies I watched some years ago were not impressive.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, filmnoirguy said:

How could Elia Kazan take his own novel (which I totally liked) and turn it into such a terrible movie?  Leonard Maltin rated it with one of his few BOMBS.

Is it worth reading?  

Because the movie certainly isn't worth watching.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Mr. Gorman said:

  

In regards to THE ARRANGEMENT (1969) it's hard to believe Kirk Douglas (b. December 1916) was older than Richard Boone (b. June 1917).  Boone had more wrinkles for a man of his age than any other actor I know of.   Alcohol, cigarettes and Sun will age anyone a lot faster . . . but still the amount of wrinkles he had for the age he was astounds me.

That I didn't know!   Kirk, of course, always kept himself in shape.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Hibi said:

Even then you can't believe it! I saw most of it.  I've attempted to watch it before, but could never make it through. UNBELIEVABLY BAD. Kirk and Boone vie for worst over acting performance. GAG inducing. I missed Deborah's nude scene. All for naught!

lol, right?

"YOU ARE MY SON, YOU GIVE ME MONEY!"

"GET HAM, ROAST BEEF!"  

Deborah steps out onto the bedroom patio for a whiff of fresh air (or supposedly to regroup after she initially fails to get Kirk's erotic juices flowing since he's always thinking about Faye), then turns around and the camera follows her back into their boudoir where she sheds her nightgown, and we can definitely see that it is Kerr's own body and bum.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Bronxgirl48 said:

lol, right?

"YOU ARE MY SON, YOU GIVE ME MONEY!"

"GET HAM, ROAST BEEF!"  

Deborah steps out onto the bedroom patio for a whiff of fresh air (or supposedly to regroup after she initially fails to get Kirk's erotic juices flowing since he's always thinking about Faye), then turns around and the camera follows her back into their boudoir where she sheds her nightgown, and we can definitely see that it is Kerr's own body and bum.

LOL! Didn't you love those scenes with 2 Kirks for the price of one? :D 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bronxgirl48 said:

CinemaInternational, do you know who wrote those Times reviews?  They are priceless.

I love the description of Gregory Peck's 1969 performances as "ambassadorian", lol.

Vincent Canby, I think.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Bronxgirl48 said:

That I didn't know!   Kirk, of course, always kept himself in shape.

Yes, I knew they had to be close in age. Wasn't Nehemiah Persoff available??? (Unbelievably, he's still ALIVE! I looked him up to spell his name right)  Actually, now that I look more closely Persoff and Kirk were close in age too!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, speedracer5 said:

I agree that Jose Ferrer was pretty hammy in that part, though I enjoy seeing people (who deserve it) get what's coming to them, so I liked that scene.  Interesting what you said about MacMurray.  While I noticed that he seemed pretty indifferent to everything that was going on on The Caine, I didn't really pick-up on him doing anything overt.  When Jose Ferrer gave him his verbal lashing re: putting the idea about Queeg's paranoia into everyone's minds so that it would grow, I didn't immediately think that he was doing anything under-handed.  Maybe I'm just not up on my military politics, or I need to re-watch the film again.

May Wynn was not anything to write home about.  The ONLY thing notable about her was the song she was singing at the beginning of the film.  It was the same song that Tom Neal's girlfriend is singing at the beginning of Detour.   Other than that, she was so dull and Robert Francis was so dull and his mother was so dull, that they were the dullest couple with mommy issues ever! 

 

Just my opinion of course about Fred as Keefer, but I think it's more the script than MacMurray himself; an example: after Keefer finishes his testimony he's walking out the courtroom door to be greeted by crew mates who still believe he's a stand-up guy, and they say things like "Hey, at least you knew what you were doing", whereupon a guilty Fred lowers his voice and replies "Yeah....yeah, I knew what I was doing".   All that scene required was just a quick "Yeah", then have Keefer slink away.   Later, after Barney tells him something like "I didn't think you'd have the guts to show up", Keefer remarks "I didn't have the guts not to".   I don't think Keefer needed to say anything at all.   Again, I thought the script was a bit too...what...overdone perhaps.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hibi said:

Yes, I knew they had to be close in age. Wasn't Nehemiah Persoff available??? (Unbelievably, he's still ALIVE! I looked him up to spell his name right)  Actually, now that I look more closely Persoff and Kirk were close in age too!

Ha!  Yes, Nehemiah is still kicking.   But I'm thinking he would have been just as hammy.

I'm also picturing Lawrence Olivier.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bronxgirl48 said:

Ha!  Yes, Nehemiah is still kicking.   But I'm thinking he would have been just as hammy.

I'm also picturing Lawrence Olivier.....

Hammy too. I guess its the way it was written (AND directed!)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, amazing, isn't it?

Especially when you consider the subtlety and sensitivity Kazan displayed in A TREE GROWS IN BROOKLYN, another film about the immigrant experience in America.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bronxgirl48 said:

Yes, amazing, isn't it?

Especially when you consider the subtlety and sensitivity Kazan displayed in A TREE GROWS IN BROOKLYN, another film about the immigrant experience in America.

I guess he was just too close to the material. LOL.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

From the last few weeks:

In A Lonely Place (1950) Really liked it.  Bogart was great in these roles of either the anti-hero or villain.  I(spoiler) never suspected he committed the murder in question, but was trying to figure out if he was a good guy or not.

9 to 5 (1980) Meh.  Few funny spots, but not sure why this is so endeared.

Wings of Desire (1987) First time watching this and long overdue.  I liked the American re-make when i saw it in the cinema in high school.  SPOILER Not sure i like how the girl is automatically drawn to the now mortal angel and they end up together without him having to say or do much to woo her.  Think the US version works the relationship parts better, but i do prefer the this arthouse film better.  Not sure if i like how Peter Falk plays himself and is a fallen angel or not.  Definitely interesting.

Crime by Night  (1944) I really liked this and it was nice and short.  Actually wish there was more films featuring this detective and his secretary.  Feels like it should be part of a series.

Lydia (1941) Melodrama that was just interesting enough to keep my attention to watch this in one sitting.

The Trip to Greece (2020) The 4th and supposedly last installment of Michael Winterbottom's The Trip series.  Love these films.  Could watch Coogan and Brydon banter and mock each other all day.  Hope they end up making more.

Bill an d Ted Face the Music (2020) Had to watch this one because i loved the first in my youth and went on my first date as a 12 year old to see it.  This one livened things up enough for while keeping some of the original jokes in place.  Not sure i'd recommend it but i thought it was about as good as it could ever reasonably be.

The Big Chill (1980) Like the concept for this film, but not entirely sure i like the finished story.  Something about listening to a bunch of self-serving middle-aged liberal yuppies talk on and on isn't appealing but about half of the character are interesting enough to push the movie forward.  i wonder if the deleted scenes where we see Kevin Costner actually alive in flashbacks would've made it better.  Also wonder if this film would be remembered if the soundtrack wasn't so good.

Skin: The history of nudity in film (2020) Definitely worth a watch for film history buffs.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bronxgirl48 said:

Is it worth reading?  

Because the movie certainly isn't worth watching.

The novel was great. I first read it in 1968 and found it fabulous. Read it twice more in the years that followed.

The movie went very, very wrong and was terribly miscast in the lead role. The central character of the novel is a 1960's advertising executive named Eddie Anderson. Jason Robards Jr. was born to play this role - if you read the novel and picture him from his 1960's image and speaking style, you'll not be able to imagine anyone else in the role. He'd have been perfect in every way.

Kazan had planned for Brando to play the part - and for a time it seemed that that might happen. But when Brando eventually (and wisely) withdrew, Kazan went with Kirk Douglas. This was as disastrous a choice as is imaginable and the resulting movie is definitive in proving so.

A great novel could have been a wonderful film - if only Robards had been Eddie Anderson.

What could have been. I'm still disappointed after all these years about this.

But do read the novel - it is worthwhile. Naturally, the world is kind of different now than back in the mid 60's and the novel will no doubt be somewhat dated in its feel today, but I can't imagine it wouldn't still be highly entertaining. At the time, it almost felt life-changing.

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bronxgirl48 said:

Yep.

AMERICA, AMERICA suffers from this as well.

I've never been able to sit through all of that one either.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, 37kitties said:

The novel was great. I first read it in 1968 and found it fabulous. Read it twice more in the years that followed.

The movie went very, very wrong and was terribly miscast in the lead role. The central character of the novel is a 1960's advertising executive named Eddie Anderson. Jason Robards Jr. was born to play this role - if you read the novel and picture him from his 1960's image and speaking style, you'll not be able to imagine anyone else in the role. He'd have been perfect in every way.

Kazan had planned for Brando to play the part - and for a time it seemed that that might happen. But when Brando eventually (and wisely) withdrew, Kazan went with Kirk Douglas. This was as disastrous a choice as is imaginable and the resulting movie is definitive in proving so.

A great novel could have been a wonderful film - if only Robards had been Eddie Anderson.

What could have been. I'm still disappointed after all these years about this.

Thanks.

Jason is spectacular in LONG DAY'S JOURNEY INTO NIGHT so I imagine he could have been perfect as Eddie, even though I think Kirk seems more "at home", for lack of a better phrase, with the Greek/Turkish "ethnicity" of that particular family.   Robards fits in more easefully (is that a word?) with the whole Irish O'Neill background; I could never see Douglas in that part.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, 37kitties said:

The novel was great. I first read it in 1968 and found it fabulous. Read it twice more in the years that followed.

The movie went very, very wrong and was terribly miscast in the lead role. The central character of the novel is a 1960's advertising executive named Eddie Anderson. Jason Robards Jr. was born to play this role - if you read the novel and picture him from his 1960's image and speaking style, you'll not be able to imagine anyone else in the role. He'd have been perfect in every way.

Kazan had planned for Brando to play the part - and for a time it seemed that that might happen. But when Brando eventually (and wisely) withdrew, Kazan went with Kirk Douglas. This was as disastrous a choice as is imaginable and the resulting movie is definitive in proving so.

A great novel could have been a wonderful film - if only Robards had been Eddie Anderson.

What could have been. I'm still disappointed after all these years about this.

But do read the novel - it is worthwhile. Naturally, the world is kind of different now than back in the mid 60's and the novel will no doubt be somewhat dated in its feel today, but I can't imagine it wouldn't still be highly entertaining. At the time, it almost felt life-changing.

I couldn't have said it better myself, 37kitties.  Thanks for the great answer.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bronxgirl48 said:

Thanks.

Jason is spectacular in LONG DAY'S JOURNEY INTO NIGHT so I imagine he could have been perfect as Eddie, even though I think Kirk seems more "at home", for lack of a better phrase, with the Greek/Turkish "ethnicity" of that particular family.

I think you're very wrong about that. I worked with a man whose name was Dimson - but it had been anglicized from the original Dimopoulis - and he was almost the spitting image of Jason. A very distinguished-looking gentleman of Greek ancestry - and very handsome in the Robards way. Same size and build too.

  • Thanks 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...