I Just Watched...

[LornaHansonForbes]

Re:  FLAXY MARTIN 

I finished it, but it made such a little impression on me I didn’t really feel like giving it a review. Malone picked up Zachary Scott totally “dark passage” style, she showed up and gave him a ride out of nowhere And then found out he was an escaped prisoner and totally didn’t care...went on to aid and abet him completely, No questions, concerns or reservations.

[LornaHansonForbes]

Also, as The title character, Virginia Mayo was certainly not in FLAXY much at all, which was a shame because she was such a vile nasty ****.

LOVED HER

 

[CaveGirl]

20 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

Re:  FLAXY MARTIN 

I finished it, but it made such a little impression on me I didn’t really feel like giving it a review. Malone picked up Zachary Scott totally “dark passage” style, she showed up and gave him a ride out of nowhere And then found out he was an escaped prisoner and totally didn’t care...went on to aid and abet him completely, No questions, concerns or reservations.

I wouldn't care either if he was an escaped prisoner or was friends with Carrot Top.

It's Zachary Scott for gosh sakes! So suave and sophisticated.

Now you know you will have a good time with him, unless you've got a daughter named Veda.

[LornaHansonForbes]

9 minutes ago, CaveGirl said:

I wouldn't care either if he was an escaped prisoner or was friends with Carrot Top.

It's Zachary Scott for gosh sakes! So suave and sophisticated.

Now you know you will have a good time with him, unless you've got a daughter named Veda.

That is true. 

Zachary Scott was adorable- especially without the mustache (ie THE SOUTHERNER) I think he maybe wasn’t the best actor in the world, but seriously a pretty mug can blind me to a (male) actor’s shortcomings anytime

[Hibi]

34 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

Re:  FLAXY MARTIN 

I finished it, but it made such a little impression on me I didn’t really feel like giving it a review. Malone picked up Zachary Scott totally “dark passage” style, she showed up and gave him a ride out of nowhere And then found out he was an escaped prisoner and totally didn’t care...went on to aid and abet him completely, No questions, concerns or reservations.

LOL. How did the sheriff and Elisha find them?

[Hibi]

33 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

Also, as The title character, Virginia Mayo was certainly not in FLAXY much at all, which was a shame because she was such a vile nasty ****.

LOVED HER

 

Yeah, it's like they forgot about her, then remembered they needed her for the final scenes. LOL.

[Hibi]

3 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

That is true. 

Zachary Scott was adorable- especially without the mustache (ie THE SOUTHERNER) I think he maybe wasn’t the best actor in the world, but seriously a pretty mug can blind me to a (male) actor’s shortcomings anytime

He had beautiful eyes.......

[CaveGirl]

5 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

That is true. 

Zachary Scott was adorable- especially without the mustache (ie THE SOUTHERNER) I think he maybe wasn’t the best actor in the world, but seriously a pretty mug can blind me to a (male) actor’s shortcomings anytime

The mustache factor is not unlike the Max Factor in films, Lorna.

To don one or not to don one, that is the question just like should I not wear make-up and look like Jane Wyman in "Johnny Belinda" and possibly win an Oscar or not.

I was watching one of my favorite Errol films recently, "The Sisters" and really thought he looked quite dishy without the upper lip adornment. But of course, he also knew how to work that mustache as in playing the Earl of Essex and so on. Both he and Scott could look appealing either way, unlike Sebastian Cabot who without a beard and mustache, was just not quite as cute. 

[LornaHansonForbes]

26 minutes ago, Hibi said:

Yeah, it's like they forgot about her, then remembered they needed her for the final scenes. LOL.

“WHERES THE MAYO?” cries audience!

[LornaHansonForbes]

28 minutes ago, Hibi said:

LOL. How did the sheriff and Elisha find them?

He turned himself in. Had Malone make the call.

[LornaHansonForbes]

Zachary Scott is like one of the Weasel Gang from WIND IN THE WILLOWS took on a sexy human form.

[Hibi]

6 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

“WHERES THE MAYO?” cries audience!

LOL. No wonder I fell asleep...........

[Hibi]

5 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

He turned himself in. Had Malone make the call.

Sounds like I slept through the boring part.........

[cigarjoe]

6 hours ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

GOD FORGIVE ME, but I genuinely prefer the remake.

dispensations granted....

[cigarjoe]

6 hours ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

FALLEN ANGEL (1945) is on TCM ON DEMAND if anyone is interested. I made it an hour and fifteen minutes in this time. it's nice to look at, although damn there is a lot rear projection footage, especially the beach scenes. i half-expected them to start screening an old "cowboys and indians" pic for a moment or two behind Dana and Linda (or Dana and Alice Faye) ... Dana Andrews also wears a button-up, long sleeved shirt and tie to the beach and at no time is he wearing less for four ounces of Pomade in his hair. He also should have had a friend- not George Brent- go with him to the tailor when he was getting fitted for pants, because the rear view is nowhere as nice as the front. this was an off performance from him, not really his fault because- spoilers kinda sort but honestly, not really- once "rhymes with 'witch' " Goddess LINDA DARNELL leaves the scene, this thing takes the most ludicrous left turn you can imagine; it's some lazy direction from Otto Preminger of a badly and clearly re-re-re-re-rewritten script. Linda Darnell is everything in this movie, like a proletariat, unrefined GENE TIERNEY- and just as lovely (with an added couple liters of sex appeal.) Ann Revere is also in this, hating life as usual- but at least she has a somewhat flattering hairstyle instead of her usual lentil-picking washer-woman look.

You jumped ship before the Dana Andrews/Alice Fay sex scene?

[FilmSnob]

I can't say I just watched Ordet, because it was a couple weeks ago. But I didn't care for it at all.

Probably the only part I liked was the black humor, when a woman dies, and the father laments out loud how wonderful it is that people like his insane son are the ones who live.

Otherwise it was an incredibly inauthentic, turgid, pedantic chore to watch, with about as much subtlety as a sledgehammer. Every scene was predictable.

I don't think I've ever seen a film/tv show with religious themes successfully directed by an atheist. It's like a white man trying to direct a movie about what it's like to be black.

[LawrenceA]

I couldn't disagree more in regards to your comments on Ordet, but I continue to look forward to your thoughts on Ozu's work.

[FilmSnob]

3 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

I couldn't disagree more in regards to your comments on Ordet, but I continue to look forward to your thoughts on Ozu's work.

It's ok, I know I'm in the minority!

[CaveGirl]

1 hour ago, FilmSnob said:

I can't say I just watched Ordet, because it was a couple weeks ago. But I didn't care for it at all.

Probably the only part I liked was the black humor, when a woman dies, and the father laments out loud how wonderful it is that people like his insane son are the ones who live.

Otherwise it was an incredibly inauthentic, turgid, pedantic chore to watch, with about as much subtlety as a sledgehammer. Every scene was predictable.

I don't think I've ever seen a film/tv show with religious themes successfully directed by an atheist. It's like a white man trying to direct a movie about what it's like to be black.

Dreyer believed in the perfect shot and framing for every scene in a film. As a visual medium this was his mantra and perhaps those attuned to other attributes of movies, find it difficult to understand or appreciate the Dreyer modus operandi.

Nonwithstanding who is being described as an "atheist" in this instance, there would seem to be in your theory a belief that any atheist is lacking in knowledge of religion, hence making such an invalid spectator of its values or deficits. That presupposes that an atheist is less informed than a believer, when often the opposite is true. The atheist could have had sixteen or more years of constant religious training in biblical studies or works based on religious principles and then that very knowledge is what makes the atheist decide that all is naught and not to be believed. I've met many priests who have become atheists and nonbelievers due to their overwhelming pedigree in studying theological subjects. Other than that defense of any atheist making a movie about religion, and that I don't think the comparison to being white or black crippling one's ability to see the other side being a valid point, I am fully behind you not liking Dreyer's film and more power to you and please keep telling it like it is from your vantage point.

Personally though, I don't think Dreyer made films that he wanted people to exactly like and admire, but he had different motives in his film work so he would be okay with your criticism.

[Vautrin]

10 hours ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

GOD FORGIVE ME, but I genuinely prefer the remake.

God may forgive you but...I do too. I haven't seen the remake in many years, but I

think I would still like the original version better. The Fenchness helps a lot, those

funny little cars, the upstairs highly put out neighbors, etc. And I've always had a

crush on Vera Clouzot.

Scott became typecast as a charming, sometimes deadly, bounder, so that was where

the studio placed him for the most part. Scott zooming down that ramp in his wheelchair

and out into the traffic is ten times funnier than Widmark pushing granny down the narrow

stairs, but to each their own.

[FilmSnob]

2 hours ago, CaveGirl said:

Dreyer believed in the perfect shot and framing for every scene in a film. As a visual medium this was his mantra and perhaps those attuned to other attributes of movies, find it difficult to understand or appreciate the Dreyer modus operandi.

Nonwithstanding who is being described as an "atheist" in this instance, there would seem to be in your theory a belief that any atheist is lacking in knowledge of religion, hence making such an invalid spectator of its values or deficits. That presupposes that an atheist is less informed than a believer, when often the opposite is true. The atheist could have had sixteen or more years of constant religious training in biblical studies or works based on religious principles and then that very knowledge is what makes the atheist decide that all is naught and not to be believed. I've met many priests who have become atheists and nonbelievers due to their overwhelming pedigree in studying theological subjects. Other than that defense of any atheist making a movie about religion, and that I don't think the comparison to being white or black crippling one's ability to see the other side being a valid point, I am fully behind you not liking Dreyer's film and more power to you and please keep telling it like it is from your vantage point.

Personally though, I don't think Dreyer made films that he wanted people to exactly like and admire, but he had different motives in his film work so he would be okay with your criticism.

Hey Cavegirl, good to see you again. Thanks for your reply.

Let me preface my criticism by saying that I consider myself Christian and my beliefs are important to me, although I would say I am pretty liberal and much more on the progressive side. I appreciated the theological conflict portrayed between the more mainstream and sensible Borgen family, and their rivals, the hypocritical fundamentalists, the Petersens.

My problems with the movie were two-fold:

1. From a critical standpoint, I thought the characters were flat as paper and nothing more than Dreyer's soapbox. Johannes doesn't change in the entire movie, despite his insanity disappearing. Inger is a kind woman, but again she is just a "type". I would say the same about everyone except Morten, who was alright in my book. Everything else was just predictable and lacked any authenticity.

2. As you pointed out Cavegirl, anyone can have knowledge about a certain subject, even atheists about religion. But do they really feel it? What is in their heart or message when they are trying to tell a story? What is their perspective? If they don't really believe in a subject, can they technically present the facts correctly without being able to convey an honest and heartfelt presentation?

When I watched Ordet, I found the character of Johannes and the events of the story to be insulting to both my intelligence and my beliefs. The idea that a man could proclaim himself to be Jesus Christ, predict someone's death (or supernaturally kill them?), and then bring them back to life, did nothing but make a mockery of Christianity. People who proclaim themselves to be Christ or God or Buddha or whatever...that's a thing. Those people ARE insane. They don't perform miraculous acts and do good things. They harm people. Sometimes, they even get thousands of people to commit suicide.

People like Johannes should be ridiculed to the utmost extreme.

It's not lost on me that Dryer would have viewed Johannes as no different than Christ himself (it's my understanding he was an atheist?). But that's where inauthentic disbelief comes into play. I find it easy to tell the difference between someone who believes the material and writes a story, and someone who doesn't (hey Ridley Scott, I'm looking at you!).

Of course, ymmv.

[laffite]

56 minutes ago, FilmSnob said:

anyone can have knowledge about a certain subject, even atheists about religion. But do they really feel it?

Yes

[LornaHansonForbes]

For the record, I would have liked FLAXY MARTIN had the film had MORE FLAXY MARTIN. It was really only 1/3 FLAXY...Again, quite odd for the title character. It was kind of like watching KITTY FOYLE and having Ginger Rogers just go on coffee break about 30 minutes in and then not show up until the last 15 minutes...

[speedracer5]

Fallen Angel.  I think I liked this a little more than Lorna did, but I did not love this film nearly as much as other Fox Noir like Laura, Nightmare Alley and Kiss of Death.  I thought Dana Andrews was good and I loved Linda Darnell--she was awesome.  I think this might be the second movie of hers that I've seen? The first being A Letter to Three Wives.  I also liked seeing Percy Kilbride in a role other than Pa Kettle.  Anne Revere was good.  I liked the twist the story took.  

***SPOILER***

Coming off of the heartbreak of the Mollie Tibbetts case in Iowa and the family in Colorado, I found Linda Darnell's murderer's motive even more upsetting and tragic.  Tragic in the sense that someone would murder another person solely because he or she continually spurned another's advances.  Murder, apparently, is a reasonable response to rejection. 

***END SPOILER***

I liked Fallen Angel and would watch it again.  As I've watched more and more noir, I've found that the Fox Noir contains so many of my favorite noir films.  I've been trying to collect the Fox Noir DVD releases as I find them in used movie stores. 

[laffite]