Jump to content

 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
Hibi

BAD MOVIE ALERT: MAME

Recommended Posts

since the conversation has evolved into one about failed movie musicals, & I keep seeing the bluray DVD release of "1776" promoted during the commercials on TCM, I was wondering if anyone here has seen it or has any opinions on it. Just from the brief clips they show and from the reviews I've read, it looks like a real dog to me, and the "digitally restored" cinematography looks really washed out (although that was the one thing for which it actually did get an Oscar nomination.)

 

 

I had it on during the 4th holiday, but I wasnt really paying close attention to it. I do remember it laid an egg at the boxoffice at the time, though the stage version was a big hit...............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

according to the always infallible Wikipedia, it cost six million dollars and made 2 million dollars. Dat is a DUD. it was also produced by Jack Warner.

 

Warner should have cast Audrey Hepburn as Martha Washington and/or Betsy Ross.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warner should have cast Audrey Hepburn as Martha Washington and/or Betsy Ross.

 

 

Neither character was in it............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

since the conversation has evolved into one about failed movie musicals, & I keep seeing the bluray DVD release of "1776" promoted during the commercials on TCM, I was wondering if anyone here has seen it or has any opinions on it. Just from the brief clips they show and from the reviews I've read, it looks like a real dog to me, and the "digitally restored" cinematography looks really washed out (although that was the one thing for which it actually did get an Oscar nomination.)

Oh, I could write a book!

 

1776, when released, was horribly edited by Warner.  In the age of laserdisc, a truly wonderful version was released with the pristine elements that survived, and every manner of edited piece of film that could be found.  There were black and white snippets from work prints, an entire number was found, in color in a shoebox, etc. They also added an Overture, Entr'acte and Exit music, culled from music cues in the film. Fans of the musical (I am a MAJOR fan), hailed this laserdisc as, "definitive".  Then, year later, lo and behold, and pristine, complete print of the films, with everything intact is found.  We laserdisc fans are beyond excited to see all those ragged bits we've come to love, restored to their former glory, and what happens, the director still cuts bits out fo the DVD release.  Also, the laserdisc soundtrack was glorious, uncompressed stereophonic sound, and the DVD was compressed, muffled-sounding 5.1 sound.  Then 2015, they prepare a Blu-ray, and the director adds a couple of bits that he previously cut, but still leaves out 85 seconds of bits that were included in the laserdisc.  Neither the previously released DVD nor the new Blu-ray release contain the Overture, Entr'acte or Exit music that was prepared for the laserdisc.  I have not seen the new Blu-ray, but hear it looks magnificent.  I do have a boot Blu-ray that has a high definition print, with all the laserdisc bits added in.  The quality changes, of course, but its the version I love, and contains the beautiful laserdisc soundtrack.  The musical is superb, in my opinion.  The film's only flaw, is in the casting of Blythe Danner, as Martha Jefferson.  She has absolutely no clue how to play the role (I blame the director as much as her), and her one song is completely flat and kind of dreary, when compared to the fiery performance of Betty Buckley, on stage.  Thankfully, her role is brief, and the film picks up its stride.  William Daniels performance as John Adams is, easily, the best performance by an actor in any film from 1972, and one of the best of all-time, imo.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about Dolly Madison?

 

'

Nope. Just Adams' and Jefferson's wives......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a post so far back I cannot locate it, I mentioned Rafael Pont Flores, who wrote a very enthusiastic review of MAME, and one of you wondered who he was.

Pont Flores was a sports writer and humorist, and he excelled at both; he was very knowledgeable at sports, and was very witty. However, the several movie reviews that he occasionally contributed to EL MUNDO showed that he had no knowledge or understanding of movies; to him movies were a bland entertainment with no other purpose than killing off a couple of idle hours. He did not like ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST because it left him with a taste of copper in his mouth; I'm afraid he did not know what a black comedy is. As the saying goes: ZAPATERO, A TUS ZAPATOS=COBBLER, STICK TO YOUR TRADE OF MAKING SHOES, AND DON'T TRY TO DO SOMETHING AT WHICH YOU ARE NOT ANY GOOD!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a post so far back I cannot locate it, I mentioned Rafael Pont Flores, who wrote a very enthusiastic review of MAME, and one of you wondered who he was.

Pont Flores was a sports writer and humorist, and he excelled at both; he was very knowledgeable at sports, and was very witty. However, the several movie reviews that he occasionally contributed to EL MUNDO showed that he had no knowledge or understanding of movies; to him movies were a bland entertainment with no other purpose than killing off a couple of idle hours. He did not like ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST because it left him with a taste of copper in his mouth; I'm afraid he did not know what a black comedy is. As the saying goes: ZAPATERO, A TUS ZAPATOS=COBBLER, STICK TO YOUR TRADE OF MAKING SHOES, AND DON'T TRY TO DO SOMETHING AT WHICH YOU ARE NOT ANY GOOD!

Well, he knew what he liked.  That's really all Pauline Kael ever wrote about.  For all her plaudits, I rarely felt she had any real appreciation for the actual art of film making.  I don't believe there really is any accreditation for film critique.   Although there have been a few (very few) exceptions, it has been my experience that most critics write from the perspective of what they like or don't like.  In reality, they should write from the perspective of genre, source, use of the medium, etc.  For example, if you're going to review FRIDAY THE 13TH, you don't just dismiss it as a silly, slasher film.  You review it from the context of silly slasher films, and critique how all aspects of it fare within the genre.  Most professional critics do not do this, and they should. Otherwise, why bother writing a review, at all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going through photos on my hard drive and came across this photo from the original production of CAMELOT.

 

e34bd22d-a81e-4f69-98a9-32e1bdc062e0.jpg

  • Like 2

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
Sign in to follow this  

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