Michael Elliott

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2006)

Re: Sturges

After thinking about it, it might have been unfair to compare him to Capra but I know several attack Capra for being "light" and "too cute". The light and too cute were what I didn't care about in the Sturges films. I've got six more Sturges films here to watch but it'll probably be next year before I get to them. I'm a tad bit nervous since I wasn't overly fond of LADY, TRAVELS and PALM.


Perhaps the comedy just struck me the wrong way but this is the perfect example of me not laughing. The character of "Lady Eve" being used to get Fonda back also hit me the wrong way and the entire story that followed left me cold and uninterested. I can accept dumbness is a comedy but there wasn't a single second that I believed Fonda didn't know this was the same woman. Again, that might be a nitpick but at that point of the film I had pretty much had enough.


This is probably more to do with me not being a fan of Stanwyck. I haven't seen too many of her films but she's never really impressed me as an actress or as a beauty since I prefer blondes like Loretta Young.


That high school mentioned is one I visited a lot when I was a teenager (trying to pick up girls) so that did give me a little grin.

IMDB Reviews

george kaplan

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2006)

I think the word you're looking for is 'subtle'.

Michael,

Be sure to check out Stanwyck in Christmas in Connecticut before writing off her beauty.

Having said that, I actually agree with you about The Lady Eve. It doesn't really work for me (it's kind of like My Girl Friday, and most Coen films - clever, but not really funny). On the other hand, I love most of the other Sturges films, especially Sullivan's Travels and Hail the Conquering Hero.

"Movies should be like amusement parks. People should go to them to have fun." - Billy Wilder

"Subtitles good. Hollywood bad." - Tarzan, Sight & Sound 2012 voter.

"My films are not slices of life, they are pieces of cake." - Alfred Hitchcock

"My great humility is just one of the many reasons that I am vastly superior to everyone else." - Ramrod Clerk

Eric Carl

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2006)

I think I went a bit off the deep end there. Just a bit.

Anyway, I agree that it would have been faster, but, as I mentioned before, perhaps if one of the elders went to get the medicine, others, in the village, may be tempted to go into the forest. Whereas if Ivey goes, than the belief that, "Those whom we don't speak of" may still be out there. As mentioned before, they left Ivey alone, because she is blind and innocent.

Like I have said, though, perhaps I am putting too much thought into it.

Thanks for reading the post George. Now I think I'll watch Lady in the Water and write up what I thought of it. For the record I felt the movie was decent when I watched it before; the ending, with the music, made me feel good.

-Eric

Michael Elliott

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2006)

I've actually got this coming from Netflix but I'm not sure I'll get it on before Christmas. If not, it'll probably get pushed back to next year.

12/18/06

Waterloo Bridge (1931)

James Whale directed film about a Canadian soldier (Kent Douglass) in London who falls in love with a woman (Mae Clarke) not knowing she's a prostitute. Whale has always been considered one of the greatest horror director's but after seeing this film he certainly should be considered one of the greatest directors ever. No matter which genre he was working in Whale managed to bring out every sort of emotion and that talent is on full display with this rather heartbreaking pre-code. I wasn't sure what to expect from this film but I might go as far as to say it's better than Frankenstein, which was released the same year. The way Whale manages to get drama and laughs is once again quite remarkable, although we've seen him do this in countless horror films. The most shocking thing for me about the film is the performance by Clarke, who in my opinion gives one of the greatest performances from any actress. The way she handles all of her emotions is a real treat to watch. Everything from her characters pain to the humiliation of having to tell the guy's mother what her real job is. There are countless great scenes in this film and they all work perfectly. Douglass is very good as the young man, Bette Davis is nice in her few scenes and Enid Bennett is terrific as the mother. It was also nice seeing Frederick Kerr who also appeared in Whale's Frankenstein. I've heard that the 1940 remake is even better but I find that hard to believe as I see this film as one of the best of the decade.

Remember Last Night? (1935)

Above average whodunit from director James Whale about a group of rich people who drink the night away and then the next morning one of them has been shot to death. The only problem is that they were so drunk none of them can remember a thing. This is probably the weakest Whale film I've seen to date but there are a few interesting moments but the humor really lets the film down. The actually mystery is pretty good and remains interesting up until the very end. The biggest problem is the humor, which is flat from the start and never picks up. There's an outrageous blackface dance number, which has to be seen to be believed. The cast are all strong but it's Robert Armstrong who steals the show. On a side note I already knew about the joke to Bride of Frankenstein but was caught off guard to the joke about Dracula's Daughter, which Whale was suppose to direct the following year but backed out.

Great Garrick, The (1937)

James Whale film about an ego maniac British actor (Brian Aherne) who insults a French acting group only to fall victim to a prank that might destroy his career. Here's a rather interesting "comedy" that features no laughs. Whale can brilliantly do comedy but it seems like he can only pull it off when he mixes it with horror or drama. The performance by Aherne is good and the supporting cast, which includes Olivia de Havilland, Lionel Atwill, Marie Wilson and Lana Turner, are also good. The idea of the plot is an interesting one and could make a good film but this isn't it.

Young Mr. Lincoln (1939)

John Ford's loving tribute the the early years of Abe Lincoln with Henry Fonda. I think the film's biggest fault is that it's somewhat all over the place but this could be due to Ford wanting to put a lot more stuff in and instead of going into details regarding certain events he just hit upon several things. Henry Fonda is one of the greatest actors ever in my opinion and he does a lot of justice to Lincoln with his performance here. It was very uncanny in a few shots because if you didn't know better you'd think Fonda was Lincoln. I'm not sure what all they did to Fonda but there are several scenes where the look is somewhat eerie. This is the type of role Fonda was born to play and one he'd play several other times. As for Ford, this film certainly isn't among his greatest but I feel it contains some of his strongest work as a director. The entire parade scene leading up the murder just shows what a master the director was. The way Ford can balance the laughs of the parade to the drama of the murder and then the suspense and poetry of Lincoln trying to fight off the angry mob is quite remarkably done.

Drums Along the Mohawk (1939)

Minor John Ford film with Henry Fonda and Claudette Colbert getting married and trying to grow a pretty farm but it's destroyed by bloodthirsty and evil savages (Ford's showing of Indians) so the husband takes arms and fights them off. This is somewhat interesting as it's a Western mixed with the Revolutionary War but this is part of the problem. It seems on one end Ford wanted an epic dealing with the war but it just came off as one crazy man (John Carradine) and a bunch of bloodthirsty Indians. I'm one who defends the "racism" in The Searchers but the Indians here seemed pretty mean spirited, which gave the film a rather one sided view of everything. Even the performances seemed a bit minor but you can't expect Fonda to be brilliant in everything he does. He remains interesting to watch but again, I wouldn't call this one of his greatest performances. The scenery is terrific and the Technicolor gives plenty to look at.


**Complete nitpick but since I only found this to be a minor film in Fonda and Ford's career my mind started to wonder somewhat during the film. For some reason it finally struck me during the labor scene that in these older films the guys always wait outside while the women are giving birth. I was rather curious if this is how

IMDB Reviews

Ted Lee

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2006)

title: the big lebowski
rating: b
comments: i'd give this a c, but bridges performance was just too inspired. unfortunately the rest of the cast (especially goodman) felt too phoney for me. the story was typical coen bros, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but they've done better.

title: hostage
rating: d
comments: the story and cast were just silly, with way too many moments of unbelievability (as in this movie gets the "biggest-air-ducts-ever-seen" award). willis (as usual) was enjoyable to watch ... he can say so much with just a look or facial expression.

this is my dvd collection. there are many like it, but this is my own ...

Mario Gauci

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2006)

Jeeee-zus…so much to reply to!!!

First things first:

Quote (originally posted by Jeff Reis):

“I rarely post comments--in the internet age it often feels like every possible opinion has already been expressed, but for my money Mario, Michael, Joe, Haggai and many others have made this thread my favorite on this forum. I'll try to do a little better on comments next year. That said...”

Very glad you’re enjoying this thread, Jeff and I can only second my fellow HTFers in looking forward to your own comments over here in 2007!


Now…where to begin?


Re: IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE (1946)

The proverbial “I told you so response” won’t really cut the mustard here as I know Joe Karlosi expects more from me on this one: being one who has always loved this film (from the very early 1990s), I never understood Joe’s objections of overlength (if it's 130 minutes, it’s 130 minutes!) or “unChristmasy” nature (even if it’s a perennial Christmas favorite, it doesn’t have to be exclusively about Christmas or just plain upbeat, does it?).

Still, I’m glad that he came around to it eventually especially since, as he said himself, now he knew what to expect. Actually, this could apply to any ostensibly great film one is let down by on first viewing i.e. in my case, I know now that I should not expect to roar with laughter for two hour plus whenever I watch Jacques Tati’s PLAYTIME (1967) again, etc.


Re: SCROOGE (1951)

Joe might be expecting me to vociferously disagree with him on this one but the awful truth is that I’ve only watched it once in the mid-1990s and colorized to boot!! I’m far more familiar with the 1970 musicalization of the old chestnut with a 34-year old Albert Finney heavily made up to look a convincing, cantankerous old miser; incidentally, I’ve just gotten hold of this one and will (hopefully) be rewatching it on Christmas Day. Besides, I’ve also watched the 1938 MGM version entitled A CHRISTMAS CAROL as well as the similarly-titled 1984 TV adaptation with George C. Scott.

But, to go back to the Alastair Sim version for a moment: it’s such a pity that the so-called definitive Scrooge film version has so far been negated a definitive DVD edition despite various attempts on both Regions 1 and 2. I’d bet that this is Joe’s first viewing of an Alastair Sim movie and perhaps his eccentric character/face/traits were too much to take; however, he is a great asset to any movie he is in once you get past that and I especially relish his presence in HUE AND CRY (1946; the first official Ealing comedy) and his ancient bishop in THE RULING CLASS (1971). Perhaps, if Joe would try out Criterion’s upcoming disc of GREEN FOR DANGER (1946) – one of the Best British thrillers and arguably Sim’s finest (and most subdued) hour – he will warm up to him…

As for the silly objection that the story was too familiar to him, so are those of Frankenstein and Dracula…!


Now, let’s turn to Michael Elliott: I really like the guy for three reasons: he watches even more movies than I do, his tastes are just as eclectic and his opinions are totally unpredictable!


Re: THE LADY EVE (1941):

As others have said, this is a very surprising rating. Although I was slightly underwhelmed by the film myself on first viewing via the Criterion DVD – what with some critics hailing this as Preston Sturges’ masterwork – I liked it more when I watched it at the Egyptian Theater in Hollwood last January (on a double-bill with THE PALM BEACH STORY [1942]). Personally, my favorite Sturges film is still THE MIRACLE OF MORGAN’S CREEK (1944) – which I’ll be revisiting in early January on DVD along with SULLIVAN’S TRAVELS (1941) and UNFAITHFULLY YOURS (1948).

Frankly, I have a thing for Barbara Stanwyck (both in looks and that voice) and this here – as well as the same year’s BALL OF FIRE – showed her at (arguably) her sexiest. The plot may have been familiar for devotees of screwball comedy but the film’s trump card was in the great supporting cast and the effortlessly brilliant dialogue. Also, who but Sturges would pick Henry Fonda to play a perennially befuddled, clumsy jungle explorer with a pet snake?


Re: WATERLOO BRIDGE (1931) and THE GREAT GARRICK (1937):

Unfortunately, I haven’t watched either of these two yet but Michael’s excessive (?) claims for WATERLOO BRIDGE certainly increased my desire to see it tenfold. I’ve watched the Mervyn LeRoy/Robert Taylor/Vivien Leigh remake and it’s a good film overall but, as with much of MGM’s Post-Code product, glossy on the surface but without too much depth underneath.

THE GREAT GARRICK I know I’ll love because it’s said to be Whale’s closest film – in spirit – to THE OLD DARK HOUSE (1932). And who can resist the chance to watch Lionell Atwill under James Whale’s direction?


Re: REMEMBER LAST NIGHT? (1935)

James Whale’s fondness for this film was, admittedly, not shared by many critics or filmgoers but, personally, I was thoroughly captivated by it. While it may have been intended as a comedy-thriller in THE THIN MAN (1934) tradition, it’s much more than just that: the audacity of some of the jokes, the exuberance of the décor and Whale’s subversively witty imprint are all over the film. I hope and pray (and hope and pray and…) that Universal will one day release a James Whale Franchise Collection and include this one, ONE MORE RIVER (1934), THE ROAD BACK (1937), GREEN HELL (1940), etc. I think they owe it to the Star Director of their Golden Age.


Re: YOUNG MR. LINCOLN (1939) and DRUMS ALONG THE MOHAWK (1939)

I’ve reviewed these two films earlier this year on HTF – as I have REMEMBER LAST NIGHT? – so there’s not much point in going further about them other than post their respective IMDB coments links:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0026921/usercomments-10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0032155/usercomments-22

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0031252/usercomments-25


Steve and Brook,

Which version of TRISTANA (1970) did you watch - the Spanish or the French-language version? The film is so utterly Spanish thematically and in its texture that it's a pity I've only watched it (on VHS several times) in French myself. True, it does have Catherine Deneuve's own speaking voice but I'd still love to experience it in Spanish (despite not being fluent in the language other than its rudimentary similarity to Italian). Hopefully, the upcoming R2 DVD from Optimum - included in their 8-Disc Bunuel Box Set - will include both language tracks for completeness' - and comparison's - sake and boast a superior video quality to the disc already released by the British Film Institute.

By the way, are you aware of the fact that Alfred Hitchcock was a great admirer of TRISTANA and had even called Bunuel "the greatest film director ever"?

IMDB Reviews

Joe Karlosi

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2006)

Well, it doesn't feel too long to me now because it worked for me this time. I don't judge a film as "too long" just based on its actual running time; it's based on how long it feels. BEN-HUR (59), for example, feels rather brisk to me!


This was my mistake in 2003 when I first watched the movie. I expected it to be all about Christmas and got knocked for a loop.


No, I just didn't think he was anywhere near mean and cantakerous enough for me.


I have nothing against the actor or his style; I just thought he made a disappointing Scrooge.


You may find that objection silly but I don't. I didn't already know the stories of FRANKENSTEIN and DRACULA when I first saw those early Universal films as a kid. As for any type of subsequently upgraded or tweaked re-imaginings based on the Frankenstein and Dracula themes, those films are always somewhat different.

At any rate, I don't believe it has to be a "one rule fits all" mentality here anyway. I'm just honestly telling you what I felt about 1951's SCROOGE, and even if it seems to you that it may somehow contradict how I felt about the Frankenstein and Dracula thing, all I can say is that it's the way I feel. Film talk and observations often go like that.

SteveGon

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2006)

I have the R2 BFI DVD which has both versions - I only watched the Spanish language version though.

Recently viewed films:

Onechanbara **
Night of the Living Jews **
White Heat ****
Dead Set ***
Working Stiffs ***

Zombie Movie Appreciation Thread