1939's Of Mice and Men

Moderators: moirafinnie, kingrat, Lzcutter, Sue Sue Applegate, movieman1957

1939's Of Mice and Men

Postby ken123 » Fri Apr 20, 2007 9:30 pm

Contains Lon Chaney Jr's finest screen performance. Burgess Meredith, Charles Bickford, Bob Steele,Roman Bohnen, and Leigh Whipper in top form, Betty Field was so - so.One of Lewis Mileston'e best dirctorial efforts, from a Steinbeck novel, an unforgettable Aaron Copland score. :wink:
Last edited by ken123 on Mon Jul 05, 2010 3:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
ken123
 
Posts: 1811
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:08 pm
Location: Chicago

Postby jdb1 » Sat Apr 21, 2007 10:48 pm

Abolutely agree, Ken.

There was talk in the Old City about the more recent version with Sinise and Malkovich. Sorry, I don't think there's any comparison, but that may be colored by the fact that I think Malkovich is an abomination masquerading as an "actor."

The performances in the earlier version are sublime. Chaney is heartbreaking -- it's the performance of a lifetime, and Meredith is wonderful as the guy trying to stick by his one and only, but very burdensome friend. The gritty, populist style of the film fits the story perfectly. This story doesn't really do it for me in anything but black and white.
User avatar
jdb1
 
Posts: 4062
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 8:23 pm
Location: Brooklyn, New York

Postby mongoII » Tue Apr 24, 2007 7:33 pm

If ever there was a performance that deserved an Oscar nomination it was Long Chaney Jr. as Lenny. A terrible oversight by the Academy.
So what else is new?
User avatar
mongoII
 
Posts: 7518
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 12:37 am
Location: Florida

Postby jdb1 » Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:08 pm

OMAM was shown last Saturday night on the CUNY cable station (that's the City University of New York). I caught only the first 15 minutes or so, but I was amazed at the good condition of the print (most movies shown on CUNY-TV are in deplorable condition). The principals grabbed you and drew you in right from their very first lines. Chaney is wonderful, but Meredith is quite charismatic as well. Any of the younger generation who know him only as the Penguin on Batman re-runs would be quite impressed with him, I think.
User avatar
jdb1
 
Posts: 4062
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 8:23 pm
Location: Brooklyn, New York

Postby vallo » Wed Apr 25, 2007 1:26 am

I agree MongoII. Between this film and 1940's "The Wolf-Man" He really lived up to the Chaney legacy.
No matter how many times they remake "Of Mice and Men". The original is still the best.
"We're all forgotten sooner or later. But not films. That's all the memorial we should need or hope for."
-Burt Lancaster
User avatar
vallo
 
Posts: 283
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 1:39 pm
Location: Long Island, N.Y.

Re:

Postby ken123 » Mon Jul 05, 2010 2:48 am

jdb1 wrote:Abolutely agree, Ken.

There was talk in the Old City about the more recent version with Sinise and Malkovich. Sorry, I don't think there's any comparison, but that may be colored by the fact that I think Malkovich is an abomination masquerading as an "actor."

The performances in the earlier version are sublime. Chaney is heartbreaking -- it's the performance of a lifetime, and Meredith is wonderful as the guy trying to stick by his one and only, but very burdensome friend. The gritty, populist style of the film fits the story perfectly. This story doesn't really do it for me in anything but black and white.


Judith,
Please don't hold back your opinions. I especially like your comments concerning Mr. Malkovich. :D
User avatar
ken123
 
Posts: 1811
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:08 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: 1939's Of Mice and Men

Postby JackFavell » Mon Jul 05, 2010 3:03 am

I quite agree with jdb about the new version. I had a very hard time with it and I still don't understand why they felt the need to change things in it, even if it was ever so slightly.

Of course, my feelings are colored by the fact that I co-directed the play - we opened about two weeks before the new film came out. To me, it was shocking, the liberties they took with the almost perfect original script. Such is Hollywood today. Fix it till it's awful.
User avatar
JackFavell
 
Posts: 10050
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 2:56 pm

Re: 1939's Of Mice and Men

Postby ken123 » Mon Jul 05, 2010 3:19 am

JackFavell wrote:I quite agree with jdb about the new version. I had a very hard time with it and I still don't understand why they felt the need to change things in it, even if it was ever so slightly.

Of course, my feelings are colored by the fact that I co-directed the play - we opened about two weeks before the new film came out. To me, it was shocking, the liberties they took with the almost perfect original script. Such is Hollywood today. Fix it till it's awful.

Jack Favell you bad girl. By that I mean that you hit the nail on the head. 8)
User avatar
ken123
 
Posts: 1811
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:08 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: 1939's Of Mice and Men

Postby RedRiver » Sat Jul 30, 2011 8:39 pm

Love this movie. Love this book. Chaney is not my favorite actor. But he's so good in this it's remarkable. (In fact, I seem to be remarking on it!) Everybody is good in it. At least good enough to serve the story and not be a distraction.

I recently watched the movie after not seeing it for many years. Ok. Maybe, MAYBE there's an awkward air about it. As if the director didn't always get exactly what he was going for. Some moments are overstated. But with a story like this, you can't wrong. An able team need only respect the material and make an honest effort. This company did just that and it paid handsomely.

I kind of wanted Meredith to say, "Try and stop me, Batman! WAH! WAH! WAH!" But you can't have everything.
Last edited by RedRiver on Sun Jul 31, 2011 7:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
RedRiver
 
Posts: 2643
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 2:42 pm

Re: 1939's Of Mice and Men

Postby Gary J. » Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:18 am

ken123 wrote:Contains Lon Chaney Jr's finest screen performance.


I always assumed that his finest performance was considered to be in MY FAVORITE BRUNETTE (47), where he plays a simple-minded half-wit who doesn't know his own strength and keeps crushing Bob Hope....
Gary J.
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1783165551
Gary J.
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 6:22 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Re: 1939's Of Mice and Men

Postby charliechaplinfan » Sun Jul 31, 2011 7:14 pm

I saw the more recent film of Of Mice and Men after reading the book many years ago, I cried my heart out, it's so sad. I did find the Sinise version more heartrending than the book, I felt perhaps it pushed too hard for the tears. Great book, not sure I could stand another screen version but I'm kind of curious after what has been said here.
Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself - Charlie Chaplin
User avatar
charliechaplinfan
 
Posts: 9018
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:49 pm


Return to Dramas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests