WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Chit-chat, current events
User avatar
Fossy
Posts: 566
Joined: April 29th, 2010, 8:13 pm
Location: Cairns, Qld., Australia

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by Fossy »

The Major and The Minor (1942)

I revisited this movie yesterday. I suppose I am a fan of Ginger Rogers. I have 70 of her movies. Having failed to make a success of finding work in New York City Ginger has decided to return home. However the fares have increased in price, so she pretends to be a little girl, and then the fun starts. The major wants to go to war, but he is stuck in military school for boys. The boys have a roster to be her escort, and they reckon she is a bit of alright. The major`s fiancee has connections in Washington DC and is able to keep him at the school.Of course Ginger takes Ray Milland (the major) away from his fiancée, and ends up with him.

The first time I saw this movie it brought me to tears, and it did again this time.
User avatar
Fossy
Posts: 566
Joined: April 29th, 2010, 8:13 pm
Location: Cairns, Qld., Australia

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by Fossy »

The Lost Weekend (1945)

The story of a weekend in the life of an alcoholic. I watched this a couple of years ago and I hated it. Nothing has changed, this is the horror story to end all horror stories. Dracula, the Wolf Man, Frankenstein are pussy cat shows compared to this. This show was nominated for 19 awards, winning 16, including four Oscars.
User avatar
movieman1957
Administrator
Posts: 5522
Joined: April 15th, 2007, 3:50 pm
Location: MD

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by movieman1957 »

I like The Major and The Minor as well. I know some get creeped out over the "age difference" but I like the way Ginger plays the role. I haven't seen The Lost Weekend in forever. I thought it pretty good. It is not one I have revisited but should again just to see if my opinion would be different. Did you hate it because of the story line and subject or that you thought it a lousy film? Just want to make sure I understand your point.
Chris

"Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana."
User avatar
Fossy
Posts: 566
Joined: April 29th, 2010, 8:13 pm
Location: Cairns, Qld., Australia

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by Fossy »

I enjoyed The Major and The Minor. The age difference was less noticeable than in other movies. The difference was actually only six years. Also in this movie was Diana Lynn. I first saw Diana in the movie in the movie The Hard Boiled Canary. My wife of 54 years had died only a couple of years earlier. As a young girl she was the image of Diana Lynn. I was so shocked that I was unable to speak for a couple of hours.

The Lost Weekend was obviously a great movie.Winning 16 of 19 award nominations proves this.The story line and subject of the movie bring out what goes through the mind of an alcoholic. I think that, in the past, I considered alcoholics to be idiots and could not understand why they did not just stop. This movie brings home that that just cannot help themselves.
User avatar
laffite
Posts: 1870
Joined: October 27th, 2022, 10:43 pm

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by laffite »

CineMaven wrote: October 3rd, 2014, 2:29 am I admit I felt a little obligation to “The Classics” in my original reason to go see the movie. Reading some posts around FaceBook put a little of that ol’ enthusiasm bug in me. Not so quick on the draw with my keyboarding, I was timed out several times with Fandango to purchase my movie ticket, but I finally secured it.

It wasn’t until I heard those first three-seconds of Max Steiner’s score in that sound system that my SENSES kicked in. I was ready for the journey. I was ready to invest four hours of my life, but hearing Steiner kicked in an investment of my emotions into “Gone With the Wind.” This movie is 75 years old and the depth and breadth of this film astounds and overwhelms me. It’s so interesting that they put ALL the credits at the top of the film, and nothing behind it but “THE END.” You sort of don’t want to be aware that you’ve just watched a film; you’ve witnessed Life.

Every classic film fan knows “Gone With the Wind.” We know it so well we only need its acronym ( “GWTW” ) to know what movie it is. I know there are movies people like better, which is fine; they can go talk about those. I want to share what I was struck by with this movie, and hope it resonates with you.

CASTING

Wonderfully cast down to its toes and smallest detail. Everyone seems to tell the full story of their life in just one or two strokes. And I don’t only mean the big five, but I mean bit parts: the older woman and man who find out they lost their son but the band plays on, the man who’s carrying a dying comrade and is refused a carriage ride, the dying soldier, a mere boy, who’s dictating his last letter and many more.

SWEEPING DEPTH & BREADTH

An entire world is created in “GWTW.” I’m looking at extras and background people, far far far away from the leads, who add to the ambience of the film. The full life of the world behind the leads was remarkably robust. Then there’s the barbecue at Twelve Oaks, the chaos of evacuation, the hustle and bustle of Reconstruction. Crowds, crowds of people waaay in the distance. Hell, to me just seeing Black Union soldiers passing by was something else. Slices of life.

MISE-EN-SCENE

This might sound all yada yada yada, but I have to say the mise-en-scène of the movie is an incredible package. The editing ( Melanie reading to the women while waiting for the men to return from Shanty town ) - costumes ( those dresses, and Rhett’s outfits, were to die for ) - cinematography ( Mr. O’Hara telling Scarlett the value of land ) - the technicolor, the fluid way the camera moves, the sound ( I thought Sherman’s army was about to bust into lower Manhattan’s Battery Park ) - all of it was assembled perfectly.

SCENES

( * ) The crane shot at the railway station. The waste is staggering.

( * ) Scarlett watching a leg amputation. Her revulsion.

( * ) The dolly-in shot to Scarlett in her blood red gown at Melanie’s party. ( Yo, what was that gown doing in Scarlett’s closet anyway? )

( * ) Rhett carrying Scarlett up the stairs.

( * ) Rhett heartbroken over Scarlett’s miscarriage.

( * ) Mammy on the staircase imploring Melanie to speak to Rhett about Bonnie’s funeral.

( * ) The conversation in the carriage between Melanie and Belle Watling. Incredibly intimate and poignant. I really watched those two actresses. Their eyes rarely left each other. A wonderful scene among so many wonderful scenes. ( Ona Munson, you were great! )

( * ) Rhett and Scarlett always being at cross-purposes.

( * ) Rhett pulling the horse and wagon through the fire at the railroad station is worth ten years of movies alone.

THE ACTING

“GWTW” is really a petrie dish to examine performances. I think the movie is a proving ground where all involved could prove they could act. Not that they all didn’t come with a pedigree beforehand. They did. But they’re given a real solid chance here to strut there stuff.

Image

HATTIE McDANIEL ( Mammy ) -

“Mammy’s a smart old soul. And one of the few people whose respect I’d like to have.”


They may be the boss, but SHE is in charge. As fiercely protective as a mother bear. Discretion, ethics, disapproval and integrity all shown within the confines of the box she’s in. Ha! Sometimes she’s out the box too. Scolding Scarlett or weeping on the staircase recounting the latest goings on, I get it, I get it. No matter the circumstances that brought her to them, the O’Haras ARE Mammy’s family; She does a fantastic job overseeing them. I wish to thank the Academy too. And Miss McDaniel.

OLIVIA deHAVILLAND ( Melanie ) -

She is true. She is quietly and regally true. It’s not that she’s such a goody-goody in this movie; that’d be the easy way out - an easy way out I took for years watching her in this movie. But this time, I took away something new from deHavilland’s performance. I could see she looked past a person’s exterior and saw into their heart. She had quiet strength. She looked at Belle Watling with understanding, helped to console Rhett, unabashedly loved Ashley and admired and maybe even pitied ( ?? ) Scarlett. In her unassuming way she took control when Ward Bond was waiting outside her door, or when she told Belle: “You mustn’t say unkind things about my sister-in-law.” And what courage did it take for her to greet Scarlett in front of her and welcome her in; the pause in her sentence: “India was unable to come tonight. Will you be an angel. I do need you to help me...receive my guests.” Or when she did what she could do when she dragged Ashley saber out when an intruder came into the house. DeHavilland took a not-too- glamorous part and really made you at least try to see things as she saw them.

CLARK GABLE ( Rhett Butler ) -

Gable. Girls I need a moment. .... .... .... Okay. Handsome, dashing, virile no doubt. But underneath all that bravado, underneath all the girls he can muster up at Belle’s place or gambling debts he may have, he can be humbled and vulnerable. He convincingly expresses many emotions in the movie. He could be devil-may-care and mocking. He could see Scarlett’s spit and moxie fire up his imagination and keep him interested. He asks for the kiss; a real kiss and not some peck you’d give a pup. A kiss Scarlett means from her heart. A kiss a hundred of Belle’s girls couldn’t deliver. He’s hurt when he sees it’s Ashley’s picture under his foot. I loved the quiet way he says “And do you know I can divorce you for that?” before he kicks down the door. He’s furious when he throws the glass at Scarlett’s portrait. He’s overflowing with love for his daughter and crushed when Scarlett has a miscarriage. He gives her a million chances because he loves her so. I think Gable was robbed of an Academy Award. I think it’s best performance.

VIVIEN LEIGH ( Scarlett O’Hara ) -

“You’re a heartless creature, but that’s part of your charm.”


She can deaden her eyes with contempt, or make them sparkle with hope. And she can do more with one raised right eyebrow, than Meryl, Helen and Cate combined. And I love those actresses.

Image Image Image Image Image

Vivien Leigh’s Scarlett carries that entire movie on her slender delicate shoulders. You have to have the strength to do that and a good director guiding you. Vivien Leigh commits to being this wrong-headeded, head-strong girl. Through it all, we see her spirit. She might bend a little but she won’t break. Her sense of survival is strong. She’s resourceful and coquettish. If you take her seriously that’s your own look out. She is quite beautiful in all her scenes. Yeah, even when she vows never to go hungry again. She faces adversity squarely because she has to, but is scared to face Melanie at her surprise party for Ashley. She grows from a Southern belle with not too much in her head to a smart businesswoman clawing her way through and after the war to help her family. She’ll do what she can to get ahead - work with prisoners...or steal your beau. But the movie is about a girl who has to learn her toughest lesson; her Achilles Heel is loving a man who does not love her.

“You’re throwing away happiness with both hands.”

We watch her through the entire movie with this thought in mind. No matter what she does in the film, it always goes back to Ashley. It’s tough watching her wrong-headedness...but there is a lesson even in that. The man that’s right for her is her equal, can match her in temperament, will not let her get away with anything. But she wants what she cannot have, a dream...an illusion.

I’m picturing every actress in Hollywood sitting in a theatre in 1939 to see WHO got the role of Scarlett O’Hara, many of them thinking that they could have done this part; after all Vivien Leigh is British. But they’d be wrong ( yes, even you Paulette Goddard and you’re my girl! ) There was a combination of things they needed, that Vivien Leigh had in spades. What they were looking at up there on the screen was a woman who played many women, who understood many emotions, who played them subtly, delicately. A woman who had charm even when she was being selfish. They were watching a woman, an actress, a star who would carve out a performance that would last 75 years.

“Gone With the Wind” will be timeless.

Image

Image
“GWTW” trivia shown before the movie
[b]WOW !!! Wonderful in-depth analysis !! You have quite done it again! I will never tire of reading your 'ramblings.'
[/b]
--laffite
Sabine Azema in Sunday in the Country
Thompson
Posts: 662
Joined: November 30th, 2022, 3:04 pm
Location: New Orleans

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by Thompson »

The Lost Weekend is a great movie. It is the quintessential alcoholic depiction. There is nothing phony about it. No drinks were left undrunk. It always turns my mind a bit because Ray Milland was not a drinker, but the role was perfect for him, he pulled it off beautifully. Man, when he’s out there on the hot street trying to hock his typewriter for the price of a bottle and all the pawn shops are closed because of some obscure holiday . . . That’s plenty noir, hard to get any noirer.!

I do have to say I really enjoyed Judge Roy Bean which just aired on TCM. It’s not often that you laugh out loud. I found myself laughing out loud almost constantly.
User avatar
laffite
Posts: 1870
Joined: October 27th, 2022, 10:43 pm

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by laffite »

A month ago maybe, TCM played some early films of our Mary Astor and I am enjoying them. I posted the Sin Ship, 1930 on the wrong thread, boo hoo. I am torn between re-posting that again here, but wondering if the officiousness of doing so is well, what? Tacky? Redundant? Or will my overweening sense of The Accuracy of Things win the day.

But right now Other Men's Women , 1931. One can see right away the immense progress of movie making from the earlier movie mentioned above. In general production values, it has a good look about it and the pace of the dialogue, zippy and immediate, and characterizations deeper and sans the woodenness of those apprentice talkies of a year ago.

I sense this movie might well known but a few comments as a refresher. This was James Cagney third picture and plays a locomotive engineer and is not a part of the story.

Joan Blondell was, of course, a bundle of sweetness in this era, and for the most part she is true to her billing. She plays a bar floozie and is trying to get Grant Withers (more about him in a minute) to marry her while he is in his cups. She has an ugly scene if you can believe it. She throws a hissy fit and gives grimaces from Hell. Truly awful. If this had been Joan Crawford, Norma Shearer, or Rosalind Russell, they would be screaming at the top their lungs to re-shoot the scene or cut it altogether. Bette Davis would have revelled in it, as we know. Blondell gets angry at Withers and delivers a find slap in the face. The slap was no doubt boosted by an exaggerated sound effect. It worked so well that I actually jumped from my chair. I was thinking, wow, the greatest slap in all movies? But now, a little later and in a more realistic state of mind, I would say the second greatest slap. Didn't Scarlett give a Rhett a good one?

I'm coming to the best part of the movie so don't stop reading.

Grant Withers (who I had never heard of) was absolutely brilliant. On the surface, one would not think of Burt Lancaster, but if this movie were made in the 50s, Burt would the guy to play this role. Grant is a ne'er do well at the beginning but reforms and is invited to live with his best friend, Regis Toomey, and his wife, Mary Astor. Everything is cool. It seems that Grant and Mary are friends and nothing more. There is a shot showing calendars laying about to denote time gone by and everyone knows their place. One day when Toomey is at work, Grant and Mary have a delightful scene. In short, they are cutting up and acting like kids. Perfectly innocent. They are so good together and Mary is adorable. Then they go into the house.

The link below is the last 2 1/2 minutes of a six-minute scene. This is what drives the story, a story that is disappointing. Improbabilities galore, a scene that is absurd, in short a tortured story line. I would direct you to a synopsis online, if interested. We don't get to see Mary and Grant until the end. They are onscreen for such a short time but they are everything.

Sabine Azema in Sunday in the Country
User avatar
laffite
Posts: 1870
Joined: October 27th, 2022, 10:43 pm

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by laffite »

A month ago maybe, TCM played some early films of our Mary Astor and I am enjoying them. I posted the Sin Ship, 1930 on the wrong thread, boo hoo. I am torn between re-posting that again here, but wondering if the officiousness of doing so is well, what? Tacky? Redundant? Or will my overweening sense of The Accuracy of Things win the day.

But right now Other Men's Women , 1931. One can see right away the immense progress of movie making from the earlier movie mentioned above. In general production values, it has a good look about it and the pace of the dialogue, zippy and immediate, and characterizations deeper and sans the woodenness of those apprentice talkies of a year ago.

I sense this movie might well known but a few comments as a refresher. This was James Cagney third picture and plays a locomotive engineer and is not a part of the story.

Joan Blondell was, of course, a bundle of sweetness in this era, and for the most part she is true to her billing. She plays a bar floozie and is trying to get Grant Withers (more about him in a minute) to marry her while he is in his cups. She has an ugly scene if you can believe it. She throws a hissy fit and gives grimaces from Hell. Truly awful. If this had been Joan Crawford, Norma Shearer, or Rosalind Russell, they would be screaming at the top their lungs to re-shoot the scene or cut it altogether. Bette Davis would have revelled in it, as we know. Blondell gets angry at Withers and delivers a find slap in the face. The slap was no doubt boosted by an exaggerated sound effect. It worked so well that I actually jumped from my chair. I was thinking, wow, the greatest slap in all movies? But now, a little later and in a more realistic state of mind, I would say the second greatest slap. Didn't Scarlett give a Rhett a good one?

I'm coming to the best part of the movie so don't stop reading.

Grant Withers (who I had never heard of) was absolutely brilliant. On the surface, one would not think of Burt Lancaster, but if this movie were made in the 50s, Burt would the guy to play this role. Grant is a ne'er do well at the beginning but reforms and is invited to live with his best friend, Regis Toomey, and his wife, Mary Astor. Everything is cool. It seems that Grant and Mary are friends and nothing more. There is a shot showing calendars laying about to denote time gone by and everyone knows their place. One day when Toomey is at work, Grant and Mary have a delightful scene. In short, they are cutting up and acting like kids. Perfectly innocent. They are so good together and Mary is adorable. Then they go into the house.

The link below is the last 2 1/2 minutes of a six-minute scene. This is what drives the story, a story that is disappointing. Improbabilities galore, a scene that is absurd, in short a tortured story line. I would direct you to a synopsis online, if interested. We don't get to see Mary and Grant until the end. They are onscreen for such a short time but they are everything.

Sabine Azema in Sunday in the Country
User avatar
laffite
Posts: 1870
Joined: October 27th, 2022, 10:43 pm

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by laffite »

Smart Woman (1931) Mary Astor is returning home by ship from visiting her ailing mother. She is talking to a handsome, middle-aged man, that she met (nothing going on) telling him that she is disappointed her husband isn't on the dock to meet her. She gets home, a mansion (her husband is a rich'n) to see grim faces of her brother and his wife who live with her and her husband. They tell him that her husband has found another woman and wants a divorce. He is not home, but with her new fiancee and her mother at their residence. Mary breaks down and hears her brother say, "You've got to play the game." "I don't want to play games," she sobs. But of course (what else?) that's exactly what she does. Her husband makes a surprise appearance and she feigns not caring and approving of his plan to marry while concocting a scheme to get him back. This involves the preposterous notion of inviting the mother and the lady who is stealing her husband for a weekend at the large mansion.

So far everything I have said occurs at the beginning of the film. We get the gist and it appears that all transpire to a clean and simple denouement. If that were to happen it would be quite boring. But Mary's brother makes eyes at the mother and some cute wooing goes on. The man on the boat comes in as part of the scheme but starts wooing Mary. But at the same time appears to be wooing the woman who is stealing Mary's husband. A gentle confusion emerges and It made me think of A Midsummer Night Sex Comedy, but without the night and without the sex. Rather, a day's afternoon and evening drawing room's comedy, complete with wonderment on who's going to end up with who. (Well, the formula is familiar so there's no real spoiler here.)

Mary Astor is winning as usual. Her comportment through all the ruse is gentle and confident. She never seemed wicked or nasty. I wanted the ending to be more sappy than it was. Robert Ames played her husband and was 17 years older than Mary. (Ames, I see, died the same year that the movie was made, a the age of 42. The 17 year differential made me think of Mary's love for Huston in Dodsworth a few years later. Huston was about 20 years or more older than Mary and there were no love hugs or long breathless kisses there either.

We get a brief glimpse of Ruth Weston's left breast, which was apparently a sly maneuver or an editing miscue. Noel Francis and Gladys Gale played the daughter and mother. Both good performances, especially Gladys. With Edward Everett Horton. And John Halliday as the man in the boat and later the promiscuous wooer.

Despite all I have said should not necessarily be seen as spoilers, it's entertaining enough to see it play out, and there is a lot I did not say.

1931 is becoming a favorite year for me.
Sabine Azema in Sunday in the Country
User avatar
laffite
Posts: 1870
Joined: October 27th, 2022, 10:43 pm

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by laffite »

Carnage (2011) Ouch! Okay, maybe not that bad. But not that good either. Excellent credentials. Kate Winslet, Christopher Waltz (The Inglorious Basterds), Jodie Foster, John C Reilly, and directed by Roman Polanski. Welcome to a Bickfest. A four-pronged ensemble piece, and excellent for an actor to really show his/her stuff. There is a game being played here, a game that might be called The George and Martha game. A conversation that incrementally becomes the more fever pitched. Not all of it works. There are wincible moments that are palpably felt. Jodie Foster has the biggest challenge and she is not all the time up to it. Even Kate has a bad moment or two. The guys have it easier, especially Christopher who is the most mild-mannered but who can still speak a dagger once in a while and who is excellent with talking on a cell phone ;---). I don’t know John C Reilly that well but he might be the best of the bunch. I don’t mean to disparage these fine actors. But this is difficult material, especially considering the interaction of the group, the ensemble aspect. My feeling is that this would be best done by super-skilled, hightly trained, actors of the theater and who do theater more or less exclusively. This is really their forte. The script might be a bit at fault here as well. I’m much less of a judge of that, it’s just a feeling. Some false notes IMO. If anyone should ever rewrite it, please give us an ending.
Sabine Azema in Sunday in the Country
User avatar
laffite
Posts: 1870
Joined: October 27th, 2022, 10:43 pm

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by laffite »

The Dead Girl (2006) An excellent independent film by director Karen Moncrieff and has received several Awards. A young woman is found in the desert with only scant remains. This is not a horror film, in fact I believe it has been termed a thriller, if so it as atypical.

The Film has five chapters. They are names as follows : 1. The Stranger 2. The Sister 3. The Wife 4. The Mother, and 5 The Dead Girl. The film aims to show us various characters whose lives are touched by the murder. Each character appears in only one chapter. There is a single exception to this which I do not see as particularly significant. The screenplay seemingly tries for complete mutual exclusivity but the exception was probably needed for the story.

The big standout for me was Marcia Gay Harden (the mother) who grapples with the death of the girl. She plays alongside Kerry Washington. Toni Collette is in the opening chapter. Piper Laurie is an aging mother, recalcitrant and intractable.

I have seen it at least twice and may not see it again. It is certainly what one would call "depressing" as well as some morbid effects, not only with the situation itself, but in the characters and the decisions that have to make.

But the movie needs to be seen by anyone thinking themselves as being cinephiles [what's the term?] because it is a damn good movie.
Sabine Azema in Sunday in the Country
User avatar
LawrenceA
Posts: 929
Joined: October 22nd, 2022, 1:04 pm

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by LawrenceA »

laffite wrote: February 20th, 2023, 9:05 pm The Dead Girl (2006)
I saw that one. It was pretty good. I get it confused with Deadgirl (2008), about a guy keeping a zombie girl chained up in his basement to have sex with. That wasn't as good.
Watching until the end.
User avatar
EP Millstone
Posts: 1048
Joined: October 20th, 2022, 9:40 am
Location: The Western Hemisphere

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by EP Millstone »

laffite wrote: February 20th, 2023, 9:05 pm . . . But the movie needs to be seen by anyone thinking themselves as being cinephiles [what's the term?] because it is a damn good movie.
Utter rubbish!

No movie needs to be seen!
"Start every day off with a smile and get it over with." -- W.C. Fields
User avatar
LawrenceA
Posts: 929
Joined: October 22nd, 2022, 1:04 pm

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by LawrenceA »

EP Millstone wrote: February 20th, 2023, 9:39 pm Utter rubbish!

No movie needs to be seen!
This one does:

Image
Watching until the end.
User avatar
EP Millstone
Posts: 1048
Joined: October 20th, 2022, 9:40 am
Location: The Western Hemisphere

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by EP Millstone »

LawrenceA wrote: February 20th, 2023, 9:42 pm This one does . . .
After one has read the Louis May Alcott novelette, seeing the movie is superfluous.
"Start every day off with a smile and get it over with." -- W.C. Fields
Post Reply