Lorna wrote: ↑December 6th, 2023, 9:38 am
Have any of you ever had a "MOVIE BUDDY"/"FILM FRIEND"/and/or someone with whom you shared similar media-related tastes 99.99999999999% of the time
Yes, and he's an infrequently on this board. He often talks me into getting out to the theater to see something I don't want to see-& having a great time!
Lorna wrote: ↑December 6th, 2023, 9:38 amAnd then- whilst recovering from illness, I saw it was on AMAZON PRIME and I decided to TORTURE MYSELF (I rarely watch MODERN MOVIES...)
I rarely see modern movies too. And I have an illness that "attacks" sporadically.
These are the times I've saved unseen long epics like LAWRENCE OF ARABIA, DR ZHIVAGO, FIDDLER ON THE ROOF etc for viewing, when bed bound, a bored captive.
Lorna wrote: ↑December 6th, 2023, 9:38 amhope for THE MEDIUM OF STORYTELLING- which is a RARE thing in modern movies.
Boy do I agree with that.
I may not like David Lynch or Quentin Tarantino films (nor recently discussed Ken Russell) but I do appreciate their attempt at modern movie storytelling.
A divorcee (Michael Learned) arrives in San Francisco and joins a choir run by a strict taskmaster (John Houseman).
I remember seeing bits of this TV movie when first broadcast. It is an OK movie set around the beginning of Halloween and ending with a Christmas concert of Handel's Messiah. You may like it if you prefer less sentimental Yuletide movie. Though it gets it bit too morbid with deaths, illness, loneliness, poverty. It needed a bit more Christmas cheer. But Houseman is excellent as the choir master.
Lorna wrote: ↑December 6th, 2023, 9:38 am
Have any of you ever had a "MOVIE BUDDY"/"FILM FRIEND"/and/or someone with whom you shared similar media-related tastes 99.99999999999% of the time [even about things that were super obscure or esoteric or could maybe possibly qualify as "nitpicking"]???
They hate the films you hate, they love the films you love, they're middling on the same films you're middling on.
and then something happens and there is a schism in the universe.
sometimes things die a quiet death, like my friendship with SUSAN W. ca. 1997 when she LOVED the movie FARGO and JESUS CHRIST FORGIVE ME, I COULDN'T MOVE ON FROM IT.
sometimes things are explosive, like back on the messageboards for a certain cable network where I one day casually mentioned off-hand that I thought THE EXORCIST was, quite frankly, goofy as Hell and thusly incurred the IRE of a poster I had heretofore gotten on with really well.
WITH THAT SAID....
A POSTER HERE with whom I AM USUALLY SUPER SIMPATICO was telling me how much they HAAAAAATED "EVERYTHING EVERYWHERE ALL AT ONCE" (2022)
And then- whilst recovering from illness, I saw it was on AMAZON PRIME and I decided to TORTURE MYSELF (I rarely watch MODERN MOVIES...)
And I sat back and was all set to LOATHE IT.
Only, I didn't.
I adored it.
Not only that, I'm 100% on board with JAMIE LEE'S SUPPORTING OSCAR.
COME FOR ME.
I was enchanted and bemused...there was one part near the end where MY TELEVISION CRASHED and RETURNED TO THE MAIN MENU and I SWEAR TO YOU GUYS, I TOTALLY THOUGHT THE MOVIE SOMEHOW KNEW WHAT MY HOMEPAGE LOOKED LIKE and then I glanced at THE TIME on the upper right of the screen and was like "HOW DID THEY KNOW WHAT TIME IT IS TOO???"
THIS MOVIE WILL MESS WITH YOUR HEAD- although it's not doing anything altogether superduper new- but it is doing it in a fun way.
It's a wild movie and a well-acted movie, and a rare 21st century film that I unequivocally came away from uplifted and with hope- and not just hope in general- but hope for THE MEDIUM OF STORYTELLING- which is a RARE thing in modern movies.
Lorna, your posts are an adventure!
One of my favorite posts of all time was that arty take you did on TOO LATE FOR TEARS a few years ago. I tried to save it but in doing so I lost the format, which is vital. If you have it in your files, could you post it here?
Would that have been posted on this thread (over there on the TCM forum)?. Archive dot come has posts from the TCM forum, maybe it would be there. I miss it. I was to look at it again, wah!
//
Sorry that I haven't been much online the last few days. Bad weather and vulnerable wi-fi have seen to it. Anyway, want to make a brief mention of a recent viewing before going to make some notes on some of what you all have been talking about recently.
The recent viewing was of, for me, a rare journey into nearly new moviemaking (by this, read as post 2000), and it was a crime melodrama called Widows (2018). It was based on a story which had already been filmed twice for TV (in England in 1983, in America in 2002), and maybe perhaps it should have remained at miniseries length. The film is a frustrating affair because the acting is very good across the board, and the directing is strong, but the script is scattershot, hardly giving us enough information about nearly all the characters in the film. It makes for a weird experience, a film that is clearly well-made, but simply disappointing at the time because it doesn't cut deep enough. Still, Viola Davis makes a strong lead, even with minimal dialogue (her eyes do a lot of acting here) and it is great to hear a new song by Sade over the closing credits.
Now, as to what was being talked about here.....
Young Frankenstein is Mel Brooks' most cohesive, but I do like quite a few of his films for their bright moments. The Producers has some of the best audience reaction shots ever seen, The Twelve Chairs is engagingly offbeat, Blazing Saddles is profane but very amusing, Silent Movie is a gem, and there are scenes in High Anxiety (the telephone scene) and Spaceballs which are very funny. He didn't direct the remake of To Be or Not to Be, but I usually count it with his films anyway; I think it's wonderful, and a great comic showcase for his beloved wife Anne Bancroft. His later films were not well received, but 1991's Life Stinks is very intriguing; there are some typically off-color Brooks jokes and a manic finale, but large sections of it go for more of a feeling of the old Chaplin films. It's sentimental, yes, but I found it to be quite moving, helped too by a typically strong performance from the unfairly neglected Lesley Ann Warren.
I don't recall much about Dark Angel (aside from the ending, which I do), but there is a wonderful Universal noir from 1944, Phantom Lady, which might be among the best films of its year. Looks like I should see Black Angel again, if only to see the tacky jewelry. (Lorna, that Joan Rivers comment was wild and funny; I saw an hour long documentary about her on TV recently. In 1987, she was $32 million in debt; by the time she died she was worth $140 million. Lesson: tacky jewelry sells. As for your earlier comment about video stores, there used to be one here which put the kids titles near the horror section. I was a world-class scaredy cat as a child [I'd even get terrified by trailers of kids films in the theatres], and I didn't even want to look at the covers. I remember being terrified by the cover of The Shining with crazed Jack Nicholson after he used the ax on the door. I still am wary around horror films; the minor horror spree I had a few weeks ago was the closest to an embrace of modern horror I ever had.)
Bronxie, Playmates is indeed bad. Saw it a few months ago, and just could not warm to it at all. Its best left unsaid.
Four Weddings and a Funeral is one of those films I associate more with the writer than the director. In this case, the writer was Richard Curtis, who made a cottage industry of English romantic comedies with loopy humor, much sentiment, and as the one debit of his films, some traces of uncomfortable behavior. His others in such a vein were 1989's The Tall Guy, 1999's Notting Hill, 2001's Bridget Jones's Diary, 2003's Love Actually, 2013's About Time, and 2019's Yesterday. Four Weddings of course has a great cast (high marks especially to Scott Thomas and Simon Callow), but don't neglect the others; The Tall Guy has a raunchy but hilarious spoof of a sex scene and a brilliant parody of Andrew Lloyd Webber musicals with a scene with a hapless musical based on The Elephant Man; Julia Roberts has rarely had a better part than in Notting Hill; Renee Zellweger is right on target as Bridget Jones; Yesterday is the rare modern film with gentleness; and About Time is one of the best films of the last 15 years.
CinemaInternational, if they were going to show a film from John Barrymore's late period a better choice (well, comparatively speaking) would have been THE INVISIBLE WOMAN.
Did anyone see THE GLASS BOTTOM BOAT? In a nutshell, the Frank Tashlin sexy-cartoonish touch does not work well with Doris Day. Now, we all love Doris, who doesn't, but damn, this space-age spy spoof "romantic" screwball comedy makes her behave frankly like a complete idiot. She and Rod Taylor, however do look as though they're having fun which is more than I can say for the viewer. Adding insult to injury, the repulsive Arthur Godfrey plays her father. (he was infamous for two things -- telling the world of his vasectomy and firing Julius LaRosa on-air)
"Highlights" of this mess: Day's toe being sucked up by a robotic floor sweeper, and Paul Lynde in drag.
I've been avoiding this film for years, because I thought Charlton Heston would be all wrong for General Gordon. I finally watched the film, and he's actually quite good. He has a heightened way of speaking that could qualify as an English accent -- almost. Laurence Olivier, in dark (not quite black) face plays the Mahdi.
Khartoum focuses on the struggle between Major-General Charles George Gordon and Muhammad Ahmad bin Abdullah bin Fahal, who claimed to be the " Mahdi" -- the expected one. Although no film can present a totally accurate version of historical events, particularly those that took place in 1883-1884, Khartoum is actually fairly decent history. Gordon's job was the defense of the Sudanese city of Khartoum from the Mahdist army, thus pitting the devout Christian Gordon against the fanatical Muslim Mahdi. Back home in the UK, Prime Minister Gladstone (a brilliant Ralph Richardson) is not keen on getting involved in the struggle, but, against his better judgement, sends Gordon, instead of a British army, to evacuate troops and civilians. Gordon has already proven himself a hero and is beloved by the public. However, the whole exercise falls apart, and the Mahdist army kills Gordon, in a scene which has inspired one of the most famous British military paintings of all time. Gladstone realized too late that he should have sent an army sooner.
The film depicts a struggle which has bearing on the current religious strife in the Middle East and Africa. What is worth noting is that one of Gordon's goals was to extinguish the slave trade, which he did for a time, until the Arabs reinstated it. That's a fact of history that should be better known today: that the Arabs largely controlled the slave trade in Africa.
Khartoum is a good film, beautifully shot and well acted. One historical inaccuracy that the writers couldn't resist was to show meetings between Gordon and the Mahdi, which actually never took place. It reminds one of the meetings that other filmmakers couldn't resist, between Elizabeth I and Mary Queen of Scots, which never happened. But such meetings make for good drama.
Not in the film, but part of the record: The death of Gordon shocked London and the Western world and made him an almost cult-like figure. The press depicted him as a Christian martyr. Queen Victoria was so upset with Gladstone that she sent him a telegram of rebuke. The public threw stones at 10 Downing Street.
"General Gordon's Last Stand," painting by George W. Joy
Bronxgirl48 wrote: ↑December 7th, 2023, 5:15 pm
CinemaInternational, if they were going to show a film from John Barrymore's late period a better choice (well, comparatively speaking) would have been THE INVISIBLE WOMAN.
Did anyone see THE GLASS BOTTOM BOAT? In a nutshell, the Frank Tashlin sexy-cartoonish touch does not work well with Doris Day. Now, we all love Doris, who doesn't, but damn, this space-age spy spoof "romantic" screwball comedy makes her behave frankly like a complete idiot. She and Rod Taylor, however do look as though they're having fun which is more than I can say for the viewer. Adding insult to injury, the repulsive Arthur Godfrey plays her father. (he was infamous for two things -- telling the world of his vasectomy and firing Julius LaRosa on-air)
"Highlights" of this mess: Day's toe being sucked up by a robotic floor sweeper, and Paul Lynde in drag.
It's a pretty silly comedy, but it does have some laugh out loud moments. I would've cut Doris' singing on the lounge and the long drawn out ending with all the door slamming, but if it's on and I'm not doing anything of note, sometimes I'll watch it. The supporting cast is pretty funny.
This is going to be a post that will make me sound like a mild-mannered contrarian. I apologize in advance if I ruffle feathers.
I confess I have always had a decided fondness for The Glass Bottom Boat, to the point that I would say its one of my 10 favorites of Doris' career. Almost every character in the movie acts pretty goofy, so I didn't take it as an insult to Doris. The one thing I will concede is the film is overly long at close to two hours; it could have been tightened up a bit. But, maybe because I saw it at a very young age, I still like it a lot.
Didn't know too much of Arthur Godfrey other than the fact that he was in this film, and that he was a radio and television personality who was enormously successful in his day, but is little talked about now except in a less than flattering light. (Offline edit from a few hours later) Having just looked at my trusty TV book which covers all network TV series from the 40s to early 2007, LaRosa might have been the one fired on air, but Godfrey axed nearly all of his supporting cast over time (which included Pat Boone and Miyoshi Umeki). It let to his ratings shriveling up; at his height though in the 1952-1953 season, both of his TV shows averaged over 45% of all TV owning households. Thinking about what the book said about the many stories of Godfrey's unpleasant behavior coupled with what I heard that Miyoshi was a most unexpected Oscar winner for Sayonara (at the time, it was thought to be a three way race between Elsa Lanchester, Diane Varsi, and Carolyn Jones) , I wonder if she got the Oscar in part because of sympathy for having had to work for him, however briefly.
I think it should be stated though that although Doris seemingly enjoyed making Glass Bottom Boat, the same cannot be said about her other Tashlin spy spoof, Caprice. She loathed the script of that film, but found that her husband had already signed her to it, so she did it very begrudgingly, frustrated all the more in that she wanted Sean Connery for her costar, and ended up with Richard Harris instead. Doris might not have been alone in hating it as it is generally regarded as her worst film (even though I found her 1965 film Do Not Disturb to be her least memorable)
As for another matter, I am the friend Lorna talked about it who intensely disliked Everything Everywhere All at Once. I'm not offended at all that Lorna liked it. Most people did, obviously enough to make it sweep the top Oscars earlier this year , and I will say that the performances given by Michelle Yeoh and Ke He Quan (the former mid-80s child actor) are touching. I just found the film to be exhausting though and Jamie Lee was underutilized ( she wasn't nominated for sterling work in films like Love Letters, My Girl, and The Tailor of Panama, so I for one cannot begrudge her a career nod for being a good actress for years) and I realize that that is a minority opinion (I know of maybe one or two online that disliked it, but the one [not here on this website] gives me the eternal silent treatment and the other is only on occasionally, so....). And frankly despite my reservations, it is better than several other recent films up for awards (and that definitely includes that only other film whuch got a top Oscar last year: the misery porn saga The Whale, where poor Brendan Fraser gets stuck in a giant fat suit with unspeakably bad dialogue and poor lighting to boot). So, no Lorna, I am not going to let it put a wedge in the friendship. Not at all. You have been a great friend, you are a wonderful writer, I love hearing about what you have to say, and no difference in opinion on a film will put an end to it.
----
Anyway, more viewings: Nutcracker: The Motion Picture (1986), a filmed version of the famous ballet with sets by Maurice Sendak, the renowned children's book illustrator. Purists might grumble at all the close-ups of faces and wish that the film would have more full body shots of the dancers, but it is staged with great imagination and the music of course is wonderful.
What exactly has befallen Neil Jordan? In the 80s and 90s, he was a director who was erratic, but had great potential: Mona Lisa, The Miracle ( Oedipus Rex inspired it seems), and The End of the Affair were marvelous films, The Crying Game and even the misshapen "remake" of We're No Angels had lots of atmosphere, and Michael Collins and The Butcher Boy were solid sagas of social dysfunction in the Emerald Isle. But his career has withered in the last 25 years, with only the so called thriller/berserk camp extravaganza Greta making an impression. Now he's done another take on Phillip Marlowe , and well, Liam Neeson is no Bogart....or Mitchum....or Dick Powell....or James Garner. It looks handsome and it's always a pleasure to see the marvelous Jessica Lange, but this is a film that rises or falls on its lead and its mystery, and you just needed someone with more charisma and a plot thrust that is more involving than what is onscreen.
Granted it has been a very long time BUT, I once caught a large chunk of the JOHN BARRYMORE/ISH KABBIBBLE/KAY KAYSER comedy to which many of you have referred in less than fond terms and, SUE ME, I thought it was funny.
CinemaInternational wrote: ↑December 8th, 2023, 1:10 pm
1. This is going to be a post that will make me sound like a mild-mannered contrarian. I apologize in advance if I ruffle feathers.
Didn't know too much of Arthur Godfrey other than the fact that he was in this film, and that he was a radio and television personality who was enormously successful in his day, but is little talked about now except in a less than flattering light.
2. Anyway, more viewings: Nutcracker: The Motion Picture (1986), a filmed version of the famous ballet with sets by Maurice Sendak, the renowned children's book illustrator.
3. What exactly has befallen Neil Jordan?
1. YOU HAVE NO HUMILITY!!!!!!!!!!
(I first got to know ARTHUR GODFREY from his WEIRD CAMEO in 1977's ANGEL'S REVENGE on MST 3K)
2. I love the music in THE NUTCRACKER, recently someone was talking on the internet about how there is a current of pedophilia that runs through it, and that the relationship between CLARA and HER UNCLE ain't right. THIS WAS SOMEONE by the way, who is a pretty respected left wing internet personality/. i tried to find information on it elsewhere but came up with nothing.
3. Was NEIL JORDAN ever all that great?
there. i said it. i don't get MONA LISA or THE CRYING GAME. didn't he do MARY REILLY too? Or am I shifting blame from someone else? EDIT: NO, IT WAS STEPHEN FREARS SORRY TO NEIL JORDAN FOR THAT...
CinemaInternational wrote: ↑December 8th, 2023, 1:10 pm
1. This is going to be a post that will make me sound like a mild-mannered contrarian. I apologize in advance if I ruffle feathers.
Didn't know too much of Arthur Godfrey other than the fact that he was in this film, and that he was a radio and television personality who was enormously successful in his day, but is little talked about now except in a less than flattering light.
2. Anyway, more viewings: Nutcracker: The Motion Picture (1986), a filmed version of the famous ballet with sets by Maurice Sendak, the renowned children's book illustrator.
3. What exactly has befallen Neil Jordan?
1. YOU HAVE NO HUMILITY!!!!!!!!!!
(I first got to know ARTHUR GODFREY from his WEIRD CAMEO in 1977's ANGEL'S REVENGE on MST 3K)
2. I love the music in THE NUTCRACKER, recently someone was talking on the internet about how there is a current of pedophilia that runs through it, and that the relationship between CLARA and HER UNCLE ain't right.
3. Was NEIL JORDAN ever all that great?
there. i said it. i don't get MONA LISA or THE CRYING GAME. didn't he do MARY REILLY too? Or am I shifting blame from someone else?
I didn't note that in The Nutcracker, but then again, orher than a brief narration passage or two by Julie Harris, the film had no spoken diologue.
Jordan at least had potential a while back, but he squandered it.
I think I am pretty much the only person in the world outside of film critic David Thornton to ever admire the movie Mary Reilly (even in spite of Julia's occasional reverting to her normal voice), but that one was Stephen Frears and writer Christopher Hampton, the same team behind Dangerous Liaisons (and we had Malkovich and very briefly Close in it as well, hmmm.)
GLENN CLOSE gave two performances in the mid-1990's within a brief span of one another- 1994's THE HOUSE OF THE SPIRITS and MARY REILLY (in 96?)
that had me thinking she was getting into FAYE DUNAWAY territory (in terms of not being taken seriously)
and then there was MARS ATTACKS! and the DALMATIONS movies...
I kinda understood when she lost the OSCAR back in, what was it, 2016?
