oh, yes, that is THE HOTEL CORONADO, which is a lovely building and did not ask to be part of this movie.
Re: I Just Watched...
Posted: January 5th, 2024, 1:06 pm
by laffite
Lorna wrote: ↑January 5th, 2024, 12:59 pmi tried watching WICKED, WICKED (1973)- which was featured as a late night "cult" offering on a certain cable network.
sometimes i feel guilty for posting reviews on films when I did not watch them in entirety- but sometimes, I think of it as a public service announcement, like the "don't eat the brown acid" PA Message from Woodstock.
the entire 15-20 minutes of movie that I was able to stand was shot in SPLIT SCREEN. Everything, even the opening credits (pictured above) are SPLIT SCREEN.
i IMAGINE that everyone in the audience ca. 1973- save for a young BRIAN DePALMA who was busy taking notes- had to be running for the aisles in the first 10 minutes before they barfed MILK DUDS all over the shag carpet.
GOD it is a stupid, stupid, STUPID IDEA. and this film deserves its obscurity.
Wasn't The Boston Strangler something like that, at least in part? I agree, no good. It is impossible to watch both screens at the same time. A minute detail might be overlooked. I wouldn't recommend this type movie, especially those with tunnel vision.
Re: I Just Watched...
Posted: January 5th, 2024, 1:39 pm
by CinemaInternational
Time to get salty and get a few licks in....
I saw the first episode of that new Power of Film series that TCM is co-parter on, and well, to borrow a term from a popular country song of the 90's, "That Don't Impress Me Much".
First of all, most of the film clips are from films from the 70s onward, and there are an awful lot of clips from post 2000 films.
Second, this man has been a respected UCLA professor since the 70s? It doesn't take a college degree and thousands of dollars to say that it's empathy that cause a personal connection with a film. Anyone of us here could have said that for free, as could anyone ranging from the humblest farmhand to the wealthiest bigwig without getting a UcLA degree from him....
Third, the eye-rolling statement that there weren't many films about women to come from Hollywood until a few years ago. The women's films of the 30s, 40s, and 50s? The salad days of Streep, Lange, Sarandon, Keaton, Close, et all in the 80s/90s? Hello? Is there a brain in there?
Next, trying to say people are cowed by respect for the police.... By showing a clip from Thelma and Louise, where immediately after the clip, they force him into the trunk of his patrol car.
Yet another piece that is trying to make us ashamed for ever liking Gone with the Wind.... Ick.
Some of the films praised here stink to high heaven....
And finally, just following popular films is so limiting. People should see a vast array of films, both ones still talked about and those forgotten gems. I always rebel a bit against the established canon of titles, and others should too.
Re: I Just Watched...
Posted: January 5th, 2024, 1:48 pm
by txfilmfan
Lorna wrote: ↑January 5th, 2024, 12:59 pmi tried watching WICKED, WICKED (1973)- which was featured as a late night "cult" offering on a certain cable network.
sometimes i feel guilty for posting reviews on films when I did not watch them in entirety- but sometimes, I think of it as a public service announcement, like the "don't eat the brown acid" PA Message from Woodstock.
the entire 15-20 minutes of movie that I was able to stand was shot in SPLIT SCREEN. Everything, even the opening credits (pictured above) are SPLIT SCREEN.
i IMAGINE that everyone in the audience ca. 1973- save for a young BRIAN DePALMA who was busy taking notes- had to be running for the aisles in the first 10 minutes before they barfed MILK DUDS all over the shag carpet.
GOD it is a stupid, stupid, STUPID IDEA. and this film deserves its obscurity.
It's not split-screen; it's ANAMORPHIC DUO-VISION!!! The most exciting new story-telling technique in film! Says so right here, in the trailer...
Apparently it was intended to be shown as two separate films running synchronously, side-by-side on a single screen. But they realized that few theaters (if any) would be equipped to exhibit it this way, so they squeezed the two separate films onto one 35mm print- and that's where the "anamorphic" part comes in, I guess.
Re: I Just Watched...
Posted: January 5th, 2024, 1:53 pm
by CinemaInternational
One final way to sum up the first part of "The Power of Film" series....
Re: I Just Watched...
Posted: January 5th, 2024, 2:37 pm
by Cinemaspeak59
Swithin wrote: ↑January 2nd, 2024, 4:55 pm
In the "Your Favorite Films Of Years Ending In 4" thread, it was hard for me to think of a film I really liked from 1994. I finally picked Barcelona, which I like very much.
I do like Ed Wood and Quiz Show. I've never seen (and have no desire to see) The Shawshank Redemption, although I know someone who was very close to one of the main supporting actors, whom I heard was a pretty vile human being.
I would add Barcelona as well. The characters, setting and script make for repeat viewings.
Lorna wrote: ↑January 5th, 2024, 12:59 pmi tried watching WICKED, WICKED (1973)- which was featured as a late night "cult" offering on a certain cable network.
It's not split-screen; it's ANAMORPHIC DUO-VISION!!! The most exciting new story-telling technique in film! Says so right here, in the trailer...
OHMYGAH!!!!
Thank you for posting that TRAILER- IT IS A HOOT THROUGH-AND-THROUGH! I am LIVING for the THEME SONG "WICKED WICKED, YEAH THAT'S THE TICKET." OH MOTHER, I MIGHT HAVE TO JUST GIVE THIS ONE A SECOND TRY NOW.
Re: I Just Watched...
Posted: January 5th, 2024, 2:44 pm
by Lorna
laffite wrote: ↑January 5th, 2024, 1:06 pmWasn't The Boston Strangler [SHOT IN SPLIT-SCREEN], at least in part? I agree, no good. It is impossible to watch both screens at the same time. A minute detail might be overlooked. I wouldn't recommend this type movie, especially those with tunnel vision.
i CAN'T SAY AS I have never seen THE BOSTON STRANGLER.
Or people with only one eye, like pirates.
laffite wrote: ↑January 5th, 2024, 1:06 pmWasn't The Boston Strangler [SHOT IN SPLIT-SCREEN], at least in part? I agree, no good. It is impossible to watch both screens at the same time. A minute detail might be overlooked. I wouldn't recommend this type movie, especially those with tunnel vision.
i CAN'T SAY AS I have never seen THE BOSTON STRANGLER.
Or people with only one eye, like pirates.
Yup, I am a pirate, screen name wise; but I, in reality, have only one usable eye. Don't ask : (
Re: I Just Watched...
Posted: January 5th, 2024, 10:18 pm
by Allhallowsday
BARBIE (2023) Terrific script, I sat straight through it. Despite reviews, my expectations were low. Loved it!
Re: I Just Watched...
Posted: January 6th, 2024, 12:25 pm
by Allhallowsday
CROSSING DELANCEY (1988) Again.
Re: I Just Watched...
Posted: January 6th, 2024, 4:24 pm
by laffite
CinemaInternational wrote: ↑January 5th, 2024, 1:53 pm
One final way to sum up the first part of "The Power of Film" series....
Wow, I haven't heard that one for a long time. I listened intently.. During the late 80s I frequented a nice lounge bar in my neighborhood with a nice, dimmed, interior and this song was on the jukebox. That same old refrain one might say. I arose late in the afternoon and listened over coffee. Talk about those little things.
laffite wrote: ↑January 5th, 2024, 1:06 pmWasn't The Boston Strangler [SHOT IN SPLIT-SCREEN], at least in part? I agree, no good. It is impossible to watch both screens at the same time. A minute detail might be overlooked. I wouldn't recommend this type movie, especially those with tunnel vision.
i CAN'T SAY AS I have never seen THE BOSTON STRANGLER.
Or people with only one eye, like pirates.
Looking ahead I notice that TBS will air on TCM on 13 Jan 430pm EDT
I don't necessarily recommend it as I haven't seen it, just a head's up here.
Re: I Just Watched...
Posted: January 7th, 2024, 5:35 am
by TikiSoo
laffite wrote: ↑January 7th, 2024, 4:49 am
Looking ahead I notice that TBS will air on TCM on 13 Jan 430pm EDT
I don't necessarily recommend it as I haven't seen it, just a head's up here.
If you're talking about THE BOSTON STRANGLER movie starring Tony Curtis, it may not be a 5 star movie, but I enjoyed it.
Re: I Just Watched...
Posted: January 7th, 2024, 1:00 pm
by Lorna
so, i think about 2 years ago, I read about a movie called LE CORBEAU (ENGLISH: THE RAVEN)- a French film that was made in 1943 while France was occupied by the Germans by HENRI-GEORGE CLOUZOUT (apologies for misspellings.) it is the story of a FRENCH VILLAGE (no references to the war is made, it could well have been set 10 years before) that is plagued by a series of mysterious POISON PEN LETTERS, and it caused no small amount of controversy as the cast and crew were seen as collaborating with the Nazis by making the movie, even though the film itself is apolitical and is more often than not, a rather conventional suspense thriller.
unfortunately the film is on CRITERION DVD, which means- like a certain number of titles- it is available ONLY on either CRITERION BLU RAY (DVD is out of print) or by subscribing to THE CRITERION CHANNEL. It is not on ANY streaming services.
I've been haunting AMAZON for all this time and finally found a used DVD at a reasonable price ($18) and bought it as a Christmas present.
I watched it last night, it's a good movie, and I liked it, but I would have liked it a lot more if it had not been so GD expensive and hard to find. Also there's not much in the way of bonus features, but that's standard for a lot of CRITERION DVDS i have owned or rented.
and this is where i go into a rant I used to go into back on YE OLDEN MESSAGEBOARDES and one to which I found very little support from the readership, but here it is one more time: CRITERION IS A DAMN RACKET and they piss me off.
I like the cover art, but outside of that, all they do is acquire a lot of good/interesting.significant titles that deserve to be seen and then package and sell them exclusively as RIDICULOUSLY EXPENSIVE DVDS even though THEY VERY OFTEN LACK ANY KIND OF WORTHWHILE BONUS FEATURES (or any bonus features at all).
I especially hate the CRITERION ESSAYS, which are just 8 pages of text of someone's thesis, GOD KNOWS the reason people still buy DVDs is for all THE READING MATERIAL they include.
honestly, it's pricing (many) people's access to art out right of their hands in the name of pretension and exclusivity.
