Jump to content

 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
speedracer5

I Just Watched...

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, TomJH said:

I assume that the Australian film industry didn't have any regulations when it came to animal cruelty in the early '70s. What you wrote about the kangaroos sounds horrible. Hopefully that has changed by now. I wonder if horses were the greatest victims of all animals when it came to making countless westerns. No animal should ever be injured or killed in the making of a film. It's only a GD movie!

I found this article on the kangaroo killings in Wake in Fright:

It’s safe to say no one enjoys watching animals suffer (not counting serial killers, anyway).  In fact, it’s usually more depressing when an animal dies onscreen than when its human costar kicks the bucket.  Of course, it’s much worse when we’re watching actual animal abuse.  Sadly, quite a few critters have suffered in the name of art over the years.  Andrei Tarkovsky killed a horse in Andrei Rublev (1966), Sam Peckinpah used explosives to blow up a few chickens in Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid (1973), and during the filming of Heaven’s Gate (1980), director Michael Cimino murdered pretty much anything that moved.

Unfortunately, all these acts of barbarism pale in comparison to the kangaroo slaughter in Wake in Fright (1971).  In this Australian thriller, middle-school teacher John Grant (Gary Bond) has found himself stranded in a terrifying little town known affectionately as “the Yabba.”  Broke, drunk, and hanging out with some questionable characters, Grant quickly gets in touch with his dark side…his dark, dark side.  Things take an especially grim turn when Grant and his drinking buddies drive into the Outback, loaded with booze and ammunition, ready to kill some kangaroos.  You know, just for fun.

What follows is one of the most horrific scenes in any movie ever as multiple kangaroos are gunned down…for real.  Actual bullets are hitting actual animals, and we watch them die completely pointless deaths.  Cinematically speaking, it’s a punch-in-the-gut scene that proves humans are brutal, ugly monsters.  Practically speaking, how on earth did they film this scene?  Aren’t there rules about killing kangaroos?  What was director Ted Kotcheff thinking?

Well, Kotcheff didn’t want to harm any animals for his movie, and in 2012, the director released a statement saying, “The very first thing I want to make clear that absolutely no kangaroo was injured or killed for my film, WAKE IN FRIGHT.”  And that’s true…technically speaking.  Instead of taking the Peckinpah/Tarkovsky route, Kotcheff tagged along with a group of licensed professional hunters who shot kangaroos for their pelts and meat (which was turned into pet food).  The filmmakers were simply along for the ride, sort of acting like documentarians.  The slaughter was going to happen whether the cameras were rolling or not. 

In fact, the Australian Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals encouraged Kotcheff to capture as much guts and gore as possible, hoping the movie might convince the Australian government to ban kangaroo hunts (which it did many years later).  But the filmmakers weren’t exactly righteous crusaders, and they weren’t completely innocent of the bloodbath about to take place.  According to Peter Galvin of the Special Broadcasting Service, the filmmakers rigged up a special spotlight using an aircraft landing light.  This way, the camera could clearly pick up on all the carnage.  Of course, it’s also the same exact spotlight the hunters used to stun the kangaroos before they shot them down. 

Before the mayhem got under way, Kotcheff instructed the hunters to go about their business as usual.  He didn’t want them “showing off” for the camera.  Of course, “business as usual” was a pretty grim business indeed.  The head hunter asked the director if he should shoot the “roos” in the brain, heart, or kidney.  When Kotcheff asked what the difference was, the hunter responded, “If it’s in the kidneys, they drop dead, shoot them in the heart, and they leap around for four or five jumps, and in the brain, they spin around for a couple of seconds and they die.”

The hunt lasted for hours, from 6:00 P.M. to 2:00 A.M.  As the night wore on and the cold set in, the hunters pulled out a bottle of whiskey and soon their shots were going wild, hitting the kangaroos in non-lethal spots.  There were animals with their entrails hanging out, trying to escape.  “They had to chase them and put them out of their misery,” Kotcheff said.  “It was a nightmare.  It was a total nightmare.”  In fact, the hunt was so horrible the crew eventually decided enough was enough and faked a power outage.  The spotlight died, and the hunters had to call it an evening.

When Kotcheff finally reviewed the footage, he knew these images would send audiences screaming out of the theater.  “I did not use 75% of what I filmed that night as it was too bloody and horrifying,” the director later explained.  If you’ve seen Wake in Fright, if you remember what actually ended up in the film, then you can only imagine what else happened during that gory, whiskey-fuelled night in the Outback.  On second thought, perhaps you shouldn’t imagine what happened.  The onscreen carnage is bad enough.

http://screenprism.com/insights/article/in-wake-in-fright-how-was-the-kangaroo-scene-filmed

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair to Tarkovsky, he used horses from a slaughterhouse that were going to be killed anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moonrise  (1948)  -  7/10

hqdefault.jpg

Moody drama from director Frank Borzage, based on a novel by Theodore Strauss. Danny Hawkins (Dane Clark) has grown up living in the shadow of his executed father. The boy was relentlessly tormented and bullied by schoolmates due his father's fate, and now Danny the young man is bitter and quick-tempered. When that temper results in a man being killed, Danny tries to cover up the crime, but his guilt and fear lead him toward self-destruction. Also featuring Gail Patrick as Danny's school teacher girlfriend, Ethel Barrymore (who doesn't appear until the film's last 10 minutes), Henry Morgan, Allyn Joslyn, Rex Ingram, Lila Leeds, Selena Royle, Charles Lane, and Lloyd Bridges. Clark has one of, if not his best role as the tormented Danny. Patrick, Ingram, and Joslyn are all also excellent. The real star is the fantastic cinematography by John L. Russell, with beautiful B&W shading. 

Source: The Criterion Channel

 

Share this post


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

it's been too long since they had a big block of PRECODES on, I hope that changes with some of the SOTM entries.

I watched FAITHLESS, a 1932 film and a rare starring role for TALLULAH BANKHEAD. It's not good at all and I can see why she didn't have a big screen career, while she is fabulous, she is not a great actress- at least not in this- it's possible there was something more magnetic on the stage. she also had an odd nose.

ROBERT MONTGOMERY costars and is very cute, but the story is A REHEATED CHOP SUEY OF ANY NUMBER OF OTHERS RICHES-TO-RAGS STORIES, and with a rather HORATIO ALGERIAN-style to the endless obstacles faced by TALLULLAH in her FALL FROM GRACE.

She also wears the below schmatte (did I spell that right?) in a scene BEFORE HE CHARACTER LOSES ALL HER MONEY...I think this is a taste of what her SCARLET AFTER THE WAR AUDITION tape was like.

1ea6002d63377d3443f4c77533009803.jpg

schmat·te
/ˈSHmädə/
noun
informalUS
noun: schmatte; plural noun: schmattes; noun: shmatte; plural noun: shmattes
  1. a rag; a ragged or shabby garment.

SAUSAGES! SAUSAGES! SAUSAGES!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LawrenceA said:

I found this article on the kangaroo killings in Wake in Fright:

It’s safe to say no one enjoys watching animals suffer (not counting serial killers, anyway).  In fact, it’s usually more depressing when an animal dies onscreen than when its human costar kicks the bucket.  Of course, it’s much worse when we’re watching actual animal abuse.  Sadly, quite a few critters have suffered in the name of art over the years.  Andrei Tarkovsky killed a horse in Andrei Rublev (1966), Sam Peckinpah used explosives to blow up a few chickens in Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid (1973), and during the filming of Heaven’s Gate (1980), director Michael Cimino murdered pretty much anything that moved.

Unfortunately, all these acts of barbarism pale in comparison to the kangaroo slaughter in Wake in Fright (1971).  In this Australian thriller, middle-school teacher John Grant (Gary Bond) has found himself stranded in a terrifying little town known affectionately as “the Yabba.”  Broke, drunk, and hanging out with some questionable characters, Grant quickly gets in touch with his dark side…his dark, dark side.  Things take an especially grim turn when Grant and his drinking buddies drive into the Outback, loaded with booze and ammunition, ready to kill some kangaroos.  You know, just for fun.

What follows is one of the most horrific scenes in any movie ever as multiple kangaroos are gunned down…for real.  Actual bullets are hitting actual animals, and we watch them die completely pointless deaths.  Cinematically speaking, it’s a punch-in-the-gut scene that proves humans are brutal, ugly monsters.  Practically speaking, how on earth did they film this scene?  Aren’t there rules about killing kangaroos?  What was director Ted Kotcheff thinking?

Well, Kotcheff didn’t want to harm any animals for his movie, and in 2012, the director released a statement saying, “The very first thing I want to make clear that absolutely no kangaroo was injured or killed for my film, WAKE IN FRIGHT.”  And that’s true…technically speaking.  Instead of taking the Peckinpah/Tarkovsky route, Kotcheff tagged along with a group of licensed professional hunters who shot kangaroos for their pelts and meat (which was turned into pet food).  The filmmakers were simply along for the ride, sort of acting like documentarians.  The slaughter was going to happen whether the cameras were rolling or not. 

In fact, the Australian Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals encouraged Kotcheff to capture as much guts and gore as possible, hoping the movie might convince the Australian government to ban kangaroo hunts (which it did many years later).  But the filmmakers weren’t exactly righteous crusaders, and they weren’t completely innocent of the bloodbath about to take place.  According to Peter Galvin of the Special Broadcasting Service, the filmmakers rigged up a special spotlight using an aircraft landing light.  This way, the camera could clearly pick up on all the carnage.  Of course, it’s also the same exact spotlight the hunters used to stun the kangaroos before they shot them down. 

Before the mayhem got under way, Kotcheff instructed the hunters to go about their business as usual.  He didn’t want them “showing off” for the camera.  Of course, “business as usual” was a pretty grim business indeed.  The head hunter asked the director if he should shoot the “roos” in the brain, heart, or kidney.  When Kotcheff asked what the difference was, the hunter responded, “If it’s in the kidneys, they drop dead, shoot them in the heart, and they leap around for four or five jumps, and in the brain, they spin around for a couple of seconds and they die.”

The hunt lasted for hours, from 6:00 P.M. to 2:00 A.M.  As the night wore on and the cold set in, the hunters pulled out a bottle of whiskey and soon their shots were going wild, hitting the kangaroos in non-lethal spots.  There were animals with their entrails hanging out, trying to escape.  “They had to chase them and put them out of their misery,” Kotcheff said.  “It was a nightmare.  It was a total nightmare.”  In fact, the hunt was so horrible the crew eventually decided enough was enough and faked a power outage.  The spotlight died, and the hunters had to call it an evening.

When Kotcheff finally reviewed the footage, he knew these images would send audiences screaming out of the theater.  “I did not use 75% of what I filmed that night as it was too bloody and horrifying,” the director later explained.  If you’ve seen Wake in Fright, if you remember what actually ended up in the film, then you can only imagine what else happened during that gory, whiskey-fuelled night in the Outback.  On second thought, perhaps you shouldn’t imagine what happened.  The onscreen carnage is bad enough.

http://screenprism.com/insights/article/in-wake-in-fright-how-was-the-kangaroo-scene-filmed

The 1936 Charge of the Light Brigade has a brilliantly staged horse charging, cannon blasting climax. But director Mike Curtiz and second unit director Breezy Eason didn't care about the very real carnage that would happen to the horses, with the use of the "running W," a wire attached to the animal's front leg causing the animal to crash to the ground when the wire was run out to its end. Stunt riders were in danger, too, but they knew what was coming and would be ready to leap off their mounts at the last moment. Besides they were paid for what they were doing as the professionals they were. Not the poor horses, many of which were destroyed as a result of the action.

The film's star, Errol Flynn (an avid horseman who owned horses during his Hollywood years), later wrote that he complained to the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, informing them what he saw on the film's location set.

lightbrigade4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alice's Adventures in Wonderland  (1972)  -  5/10

dEKgRPZoCCrqTb4FuHkNwmpIYqt.jpg

British musical version of Lewis Carroll's book. Alice (Fiona Fullerton) chases a rabbit down a rabbit hole and emerges in a nonsensical and magical world full of mild peril and terrible music. Featuring Peter Sellers, Ralph Richardson, Michael Crawford, Dudley Moore, Flora Robson, Roy Kinnear, Peter Bull, Spike Milligan, Michael Jayston, and Hywel Bennnett. I am in no way the target audience for this, not being a fan of this particular book, children's stuff in general, nor musicals. I watched it for Sellers (as the March Hare), and Richardson (as the Caterpillar). 

Source: Screen Media DVD, a terrible quality pan-n-scan version.

ralpjh.jpg  

PeterSellers-March-Hare.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LawrenceA said:

Alice's Adventures in Wonderland  (1972)  -  5/10

I am in no way the target audience for this, not being a fan of this particular book, children's stuff in general, nor musicals. I watched it for Sellers (as the March Hare), and Richardson (as the Caterpillar). 

Source: Screen Media DVD, a terrible quality pan-n-scan version.

I, OTOH, love the book (and the '72 version's 90% text-faithfulness), and it's second to the Disney animated as the best version yet done, but it's PD, and there are plenty of terrible-quality pan-and-scan versions on streaming and in the $5 bin.

A better looking full-color BFI widescreen restoration was done for British TV, but apart from one gray-market DVD, it still hasn't come over here yet.  😞

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Blood Spattered Bride  (1972)  -  7/10

d92a5-thebloodspatteredbride1.jpg?w=640

Spanish horror from director Vicente Aranda, loosely based on Sheridan Le Fanu's "Carmilla". New bride Susan (Maribel Martin) is disturbed to learn on her wedding night that her husband (Simon Andreu) has sexual proclivities that include a violent, sadistic streak. As she tries to come to terms with his needs, she begins to have dreams about a family ancestor named Mircalla (Alexandra Bastedo). Things get even stranger when a woman is found on the nearby beach who bears a striking resemblance to Mircalla. Also featuring Dean Selmier, Angel Lombarte, Montserrat Julio, and Rosa M. Rodriguez. One of several vampire films with lesbian overtones released during this period (see VampyresThe Vampire LoversVampyros Lesbos, and Daughters of Darkness). I would rank this one among the better, thanks to the well-cast leads, some good atmosphere due to the settings and cinematography, and an unpredictable story.

Source: Blue Underground DVD

blood-spattered-bride.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CHARLY (1968) *Score: 2.5/5*

Starring: Cliff Robertson, Claire Bloom, Lilia Skala, Leon Janney, Ruth White, Dick Van Patten. 

Dramatic film based on the 1959 novel by Daniel Keyes (then entitled "Flowers for Algernon"), about a young, mentally disabled man and the scientific studies he's engaged in. A group of scientists and psychologists start doing tests on Charly, in an attempt to increase his IQ. This has been on my list for a while, and I finally watched it, but I think I had too high of expectations. I thought Claire Bloom could save this, but i don't think she has that much power. I think a lot of my dislike for this stemmed from the weird camera work. The split screen effect really got old. 

Related image

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Plainsman (1936) - 8/10

Source: library DVD

This gets docked a few points for its cardboard cutout villainous Indians with no humanity whatsoever that were so common at the time, but regains some points out of its sheer pace (its completely cuckoo historically, but it moves almost rapid-fire like), Gary Cooper's nice underplaying as Bill Hickock, and above all, the glorious performance of Jean Arthur as Calamity Jane. I might as well confess, when I started the film, I wasn't completely sure if she'd be able to convince in the part, and i must admit, I was wrong. She's ideal in the film, and makes it into a must see. Cecil B DeMille puts in all of his typical pizzazz into directing it, and the result is an effective western.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Cannibal Man  (1972)  -  6/10

16005_1_front.jpg

Despite the lurid title, this Spanish film is more of a psychological drama than a horror flick. Marcos (Vicente Parra) is a slaughterhouse worker living in Madrid. After accidentally killing a man in the heat of the moment, he finds himself compelled to kill again to cover up the crime, and then kill again to cover up that crime, and on and on... Soon the bodies begin to pile up, so to dispose of them, Marcos begins chopping them up and adding them to the meat grinder at the slaughterhouse. Also featuring Emma Cohen, Eusebio Poncela, Charly Bravo, Fernando Sanchez Polak, Goyo Lebrero, and Vicky Lagos. This is a very grungy, ugly movie, the kind where you want to take a very hot shower after watching it. The killings are grotesque, but not gratuitous. The disposal of the body parts is done mostly off screen. There's also a subplot with Marcos befriending a lonely gay neighbor, uncommon in genre films of the time when not played for laughs or mean-spirited sadism.

Source: Blue Underground DVD

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Her Night of Romance  (1924)  -  7/10

MV5BNmMxOGMxM2ItMzc1ZC00MTg1LTk0MmItZjI0

Silent rom-com with Constance Talmadge as a wealthy heiress who has tired of being wooed by suitors who are only after her money. She heads to England for some R&R, and meets Paul Menford (Ronald Colman), a charming young man from good stock who is also secretly broke. Will the two find true love? Also featuring Jean Hersholt, Albert Gran, Robert Rendel, Sidney Bracey, and James O. Barrows. The two leads are lively and fun, and the direction by Sidney Franklin keeps this amusing trifle humming along.

Source: YouTube

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently watched The Mark Of Zorro(1940). I thought it was a good swashbuckler. Tyrone Power and Basil Rathbone’s final sword fight is pretty amazing. Light on substance, but heavy on entertainment value. I’d recommend it. 7/10.

Then I watched Arabian Nights(1942). The beautiful sets and costumes, exciting action scenes and humor keep this from being a sticker. The acting’s okay and the story is pretty standard. It’s no Thief of Bagdad, original or remake, buts it’s a fun way to spend an afternoon. 6.5/10.

Next I watched a film that I’ve been wanting to see for a long time, City Lights(1931). I was not disappointed. I loved every minute of this masterpiece. Everything just clicked here. No complaints from me.  Just proves how amazing of a talent Charlie Chaplin was. Few people were as versatile and talented and he. It’s funny, sweet, and even a little tear inducing. Go see this movie now! 10/10.

Finally I watched Swing Time(1936). This is my first real Fred Astaire movie. I’ve seen The Towering Inferno, but I’m not sure that would be called a “real” Fred Astaire movie. To be honest, I wasn’t really impressed that much. It was average. Great dancing and musical numbers, though the blackface was hard to look past, and likable characters. But the script and acting seemed wooden to me. Only Ginger Rogers really stood out to me. The story was also very predictable. George Stevens would go on to do bigger and better things and give me a Gene Kelly film any day. But I’m willing to give Fred and Ginger another chance with a different film. 6/10. At least my girlfriend enjoyed it much more than I did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Boob  (1926)  -  5/10

the_boob-685230099-mmed.jpg

Comedy with George K. Arthur as Peter Good, a country "boob" who is despondent after his unrequited love Amy (Gertrude Olmstead) starts seeing city slicker Harry (Tony D'Algy). When Peter learns that Harry is part of a bootlegging gang, he sets out to bring him to justice and hopefully win Amy's heart. Also featuring Joan Crawford as a government agent, Charles Murray, and Hank Mann. This is very mildly humorous, and of note thanks to Crawford's early role. Arthur has a young black boy as one of his compatriots, but the child actor isn't identified in the film credits or on IMDb. There's also a dog named "Benzine". 

Source: internet

p31665_i_h12_aa.jpg?d=270x360&q=50

boob-1926-image-17.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Casey06 said:

Finally I watched Swing Time(1936). This is my first real Fred Astaire movie. I’ve seen The Towering Inferno, but I’m not sure that would be called a “real” Fred Astaire movie. To be honest, I wasn’t really impressed that much. It was average. Great dancing and musical numbers, though the blackface was hard to look past, and likable characters. But the script and acting seemed wooden to me. Only Ginger Rogers really stood out to me. The story was also very predictable. George Stevens would go on to do bigger and better things and give me a Gene Kelly film any day. But I’m willing to give Fred and Ginger another chance with a different film. 6/10. At least my girlfriend enjoyed it much more than I did.

Swing Time, imo, is one of Fred & Ginger's best films.  Another one of their films that I enjoy is Top HatThe Barkleys of Broadway is also great and was made 10 years after their last RKO film together.  For a Fred Astaire film sans Ginger, I'd recommend Easter Parade.  Fred is fantastic with Judy Garland. I also love Funny Face featuring Fred and Audrey Hepburn. 

If you're interested in a non-musical Fred Astaire performance, I'd recommend his supporting role in On the Beach. Astaire co-stars with Gregory Peck and Ava Gardner. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, LawrenceA said:

The killings are grotesque, but not gratuitous. The disposal of the body parts is done mostly off screen.

Lisa: What's he doing? Cleaning house?

Jeff: He's washing and scrubbing down the bathroom walls.

Stella: Must've splattered a lot.

[both Jeff and Lisa look at Stella with disgust]

Stella: Come on, that's what were all thinkin'. He killed her in there, now he has to clean up those stains before he leaves.

Lisa: Stella... your choice of words!

Stella: Nobody ever invented a polite word for a killin' yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, NickAndNora34 said:

CHARLY (1968) *Score: 2.5/5*

Starring: Cliff Robertson, Claire Bloom, Lilia Skala, Leon Janney, Ruth White, Dick Van Patten. 

Dramatic film based on the 1959 novel by Daniel Keyes (then entitled "Flowers for Algernon"), about a young, mentally disabled man and the scientific studies he's engaged in. A group of scientists and psychologists start doing tests on Charly, in an attempt to increase his IQ. This has been on my list for a while, and I finally watched it, but I think I had too high of expectations. I thought Claire Bloom could save this, but i don't think she has that much power. I think a lot of my dislike for this stemmed from the weird camera work. The split screen effect really got old. 

Related image

Oscar winner for Best Actor in a Leading Role Cliff Robertson, BTW

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, NickAndNora34 said:

CHARLY (1968) *Score: 2.5/5*

 I think a lot of my dislike for this stemmed from the weird camera work. The split screen effect really got old. 

 

Related image

YES!

CHARLY is a film I would site as an example of how LOUD, INTRUSIVE DIRECTION can ruin a film, when someone is in love with their own style and wants to pull off a lot of visual tricks and cram everything they know about a camera lens into 120 minutes whether its called for or not.

ROBERTSON is terrific, but it should be noted he ran an extremely aggressive campaign to win BEST ACTOR, I personally feel like his performance is eclipsed by all the RAVI SHANKAR MUSIC and GROOVY VISUALS.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nevada  (1927)  -  6/10

Nevada-1927.jpg

Silent western starring Gary Cooper as Nevada, a gunfighter who is tired of run-ins with law, so he and his pal take jobs on the cattle ranch of Ben Ide (Philip Strange). Nevada draws the romantic attention of Ide's daughter Hettie (Thelma Todd), which in turn draws the ire of ranch foreman Dillon (William Powell). Also featuring Ernie Adams, Christian J. Frank, Ivan Christy, and Guy Oliver. This is worth seeing for the cast, but the story is very creaky, and none of the set-ups are very exciting. The director was John Waters, but I'm guessing not that John Waters.

Source: internet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doomsday  (1928)  -  6/10

220px-Doomsday_1928_Poster.jpg

Silent drama with Florence Vidor as a young woman who is frustrated living in poverty with her infirm father (Charles A. Stevenson). While she likes the handsome farmer Arnold Fruze (Gary Cooper), she decides to marry wealthy landowner Percival Fream (Lawrence Grant). Will his money bring her happiness? Directed by Rowland V. Lee and based on a novel by Warwick Deeping (what a name!), this a routine romance of the time, entirely predictable if competently mounted. The rather misleading title refers to name of the farmland where the film takes place.

Source: internet

Share this post


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

Nevada  (1927)  -  6/10

Silent western starring Gary Cooper as Nevada, a gunfighter who is tired of run-ins with law, so he and his pal take jobs on the cattle ranch of Ben Ide (Philip Strange). Nevada draws the romantic attention of Ide's daughter Hettie (Thelma Todd), which in turn draws the ire of ranch foreman Dillon (William Powell). Also featuring Ernie Adams, Christian J. Frank, Ivan Christy, and Guy Oliver. This is worth seeing for the cast, but the story is very creaky, and none of the set-ups are very exciting. The director was John Waters, but I'm guessing not that John Waters.

Source: internet

Nope, not the same "John Waters", Lawrence.

BUT coincidentally, I've seen an old photo of the earlier John Waters, and HE sported one of those pencil thin mustaches TOO!

(...naaah, not really) ;)

Btw, after checking THIS John Waters' (1893-1965) filmography at IMDb, it seems he pretty much made a living as an second unit/assistant director for most of it, and with his final credit being just this on the 1958 William Wyler western epic The Big Country

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Unholy Night  (1929)  -  6/10

unholynight.jpg

Early-sound mystery from director Lionel Barrymore. A series of murders seem to be targeting retired officers from the same army regiment, so Scotland Yard organizes a gathering of the surviving members at the large house of one of their number, Lord Montague (Roland Young). However, that may have simply put all of the potential victims in one place, and now the killer may strike again. Also featuring Ernest Torrence, Dorothy Sebastian, Natalie Moorhead, Sydney Jarvis, John Loder, John Miljan, Polly Moran, and Boris Karloff. This is very clunky and primitive technically, with a lot of the acting pretty terrible. It still has its moments, though, with some humor and a couple of amusing "creepy" touches. Karloff appears briefly as "the Hindu lawyer", sporting an atrocious accent. He's addressed in one scene as "Abdul", and he mentions "Allah" in his dialogue, so I'm not so sure about that "Hindu" designation.

Source: internet

vlcsnap-2012-01-13-21h12m05s226.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Flirting Widow  (1930)  -  6/10

4AywCBYAa8KpfIaEOu1MdeWnUAy.jpg

Romantic comedy starring Dorothy Mackaill as free-spirit Celia. Her father (Claude Gillingwater) won't let Celia's younger sister Evelyn (Leila Hyams) get married until Celia is married, something the older girl has no intention of doing. However, to help out her sister, Celia fakes a marriage to a fictitious army officer stationed overseas. After Evelyn is married, Celia learns that her "beloved" has "died", a fiction that Celia herself invented. Things get complicated when a letter that Celia wrote to her "lover", which she meant to throw away, is actually mailed by an unsuspecting servant, making its way to an actual army officer (Basil Rathbone), who is amused by it enough to seek Celia out. Also featuring William Austion, Emily Fitzroy, Flora Bramley, and Anthony Bushell. Mackaill is good, and her "mannish" appearance early on in the film ads some unsaid detail to her character. 

Source: TCM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LawrenceA said:

The Flirting Widow  (1930)  -  6/10

4AywCBYAa8KpfIaEOu1MdeWnUAy.jpg

Romantic comedy starring Dorothy Mackaill as free-spirit Celia. Her father (Claude Gillingwater) won't let Celia's younger sister Evelyn (Leila Hyams) get married until Celia is married, something the older girl has no intention of doing. However, to help out her sister, Celia fakes a marriage to a fictitious army officer stationed overseas. After Evelyn is married, Celia learns that her "beloved" has "died", a fiction that Celia herself invented. Things get complicated when a letter that Celia wrote to her "lover", which she meant to throw away, is actually mailed by an unsuspecting servant, making its way to an actual army officer (Basil Rathbone), who is amused by it enough to seek Celia out. Also featuring William Austion, Emily Fitzroy, Flora Bramley, and Anthony Bushell. Mackaill is good, and her "mannish" appearance early on in the film ads some unsaid detail to her character. 

Source: TCM

Mackaill and her mannish appearance?   I find that hard to believe.   I'll have to check that out.

Safe_in_Hell_Dorothy_Mackaill.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jamesjazzguitar said:

Mackaill and her mannish appearance?   I find that hard to believe.

Safe_in_Hell_Dorothy_Mackaill.jpg

 

Here's how she looked, on the left, at the film's start.

MV5BYjRmNzBmZDItOGYyYy00MTBjLTk1ZjUtNzEx

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...