Classic Movies I’ve Never Seen and Will Not See (1 Viewer)

[Rick Thompson]

I don't think there is any”classic” film I would refuse to see.

To paraphrase Mark Twain (he was speaking of books), a classic is a film everyone wants to have seen, but nobody wants to see.

 

[PMF]

The only movies I refuse to see are the one that don't come with popcorn.

 

[PMF]

A senior moment as Revere can't be his mother and his girlfriend. Not in a 1947 movie.

Ah, yes, but if one were to flip '47 to '74 for a movie that starred Faye Dunaway then variation of this theme would finally come to light.

 

[benbess]

Last night I saw the classic World War II movie "30 Seconds Over Tokyo" from 1944, starring Van Johnson and Spencer Tracy. Directed by Mervyn LeRoy, and with a screenplay by Dalton Trumbo, this movie is still a classic, with greater realism than some war movies of an incredible true mission that Ted Lawson participated in back in 1942, and the film is based on his memoir. The film won an Oscar for Special Effects, which still stand up well today. Recommended.

The movie had a fairly lavish production budget of $2.9 million, as well as full cooperation from the US Army and Navy. It was a big hit in 1944 and turned in a nice profit to MGM. The streaming version I saw from Amazon was HD, and for much of it the PQ was quite good, but it's unrestored, and so there are some areas of dirt/scratches/wobble, etc. I wish WBHV would do a full restoration.

From wikipedia:

"In both the film and book Lawson gives eyewitness accounts of the training, the mission, and the aftermath as experienced by his crew and others who flew the mission on April 18, 1942. Lawson piloted "The Ruptured Duck", the seventh of 16 B-25s to take off from the aircraft carrier USS Hornet. The film is noted for its accurate depiction of the raid and use of actual wartime footage of the bombing aircraft.

Verisimilitude was obtained by working closely with Captain Ted Lawson and other members of the raid. The use of Hurlburt Field and Peel Field near Mary Esther, Florida and Eglin Field (the actual base where the Doolittle Raiders trained), along with using operational USAAF B-25C and B-25D bombers (which closely resembled the B-25B Mitchells used in 1942) made for an authentic, near-documentary feel. Auxiliary Field 4, Peel Field, was used for the short-distance take off practice scenes.

Although an aircraft carrier was not available due to wartime needs (USS Hornet itself had been sunk in the Battle of the Santa Cruz Islands on October 27, 1942 only six months after launching the raid), a mix of realistic studio sets and original newsreel footage faithfully recreated the USS Hornet scenes. Principal photography took place between February and June 1944.

Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo was recognized as an inspirational patriotic film with propagandistic value. The New York Times in 1944 summed up the universal verdict on the production, "our first sensational raid on Japan in April 1942 is told with magnificent integrity and dramatic eloquence ..."[6] Variety focused on the human elements, "inspired casting ... the war becomes a highly personalized thing through the actions of these crew members."

Critical acclaim followed Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo with many reviewers considering it the finest aviation film of the period.[8] The film is now considered a "classic aviation and war film."[9] The actual Raiders considered it a worthy tribute.[10]

According to MGM records the film made $4,297,000 in the US and Canada and $1,950,000 elsewhere, resulting in a profit of $1,382,000.[1]"

 

[Robert Crawford]

Last night I saw the classic World War II movie "30 Seconds Over Tokyo" from 1944, starring Van Johnson and Spencer Tracy. Directed by Mervyn LeRoy, and with a screenplay by Dalton Trumbo, this movie is still a classic, with greater realism than some war movies of an incredible true mission that Ted Lawson participated in back in 1942, and the film is based on his memoir. The film won an Oscar for Special Effects, which still stand up well today. Recommended.

A very good film that I watched again within the past year.

 

[Tino]

Didn’t Midway (1978) lift some shots from that film?

I’ve never seen it. Gotta check it out.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Didn’t Midway (1978) lift some shots from that film?

I’ve never seen it. Gotta check it out.

Yes, they lifted the carrier takeoffs when the planes left to bomb Tokyo.

 

[Worth]

Midway lifted a lot of stuff from other movies - most notably Tora! Tora! Tora! - but also Away All Boats and, oddly, The Battle of Britain, as well as a lot of real, World War II colour combat footage.

 

[PMF]

Midway lifted a lot of stuff from other movies - most notably Tora! Tora! Tora! - but also Away All Boats and, oddly, The Battle of Britain, as well as a lot of real, World War II colour combat footage.

Well, this explains it.
When I first saw "Midway" there were moments that made me feel as if I had seen the film, already.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Yes, I seem to have a hard time getting into some of the old, I call them "message films" because of the approach to the material. I don't think there is anything wrong with making a message film they just to me can be the type of film that ages horribly. Also, I really like subtlety in a picture, which these older message films seem to want nothing to do with.

I mean not all older films age that way for me. I watch stuff like Bringing Up Baby or Treasure of the Sierra Madre once a year and love them every time. They don't seem dated or old they just seem like great movies and while I can watch them thinking of the year they were made and what sort of context that puts them in mostly I just get swept up in their stories.

I think what Kazan and company set out to do was a noble thing it just looks pretty off all these years later.

Let me recommend the following film that some might consider a "message" film, but is considered a "film noir" by Eddie Muller. This film about racism doesn't hold back like "Gentleman's Agreement" especially for a movie filmed in 1949, by Joseph Mankiewicz. This is one movie that was probably withheld from theaters in the South.

 

[MartinP.]

On another forum, a member said that someone where he works refuses to see any film made before 1980. Now that's just plain weird as far as I'm concerned.

On this thread someone has stated they don't think it's worth watching any movies made after 1968.

 

[MartinP.]

Again, remember its 1947, and America was very much different than it is now. Anti-Semitism was still alive in this country despite our major participation in defeating Hitler.

I also think Gentlemen's Agreement is terrible. The idea isn't, but it's not executed properly. We're supposed to feel so high minded toward the Peck character that he's going to put himself through this anti-semitic discrimination to shine a light on it. Wouldn't this movie be so much better if we, the audience, didn't know that's what he was doing until later on? That we, ourselves, discover this instead of it being spoon-fed to us. No, I can't abide this film.

I think that film is the worst of the 5 films nominated for Best Picture that year, which includes another film dealing with anti-semitism, Crossfire. The novel Crossfire is based on a book, which I've read, The Brick Foxhole, and was actually about another subject they wouldn't even touch in 1947 films, a gay-bashing. It was changed to anti-semitism for the film. It's quite good.

The author of the Gentlemen's Agreement novel, Laura Hobson, wrote another heavy handed novel in 1975, concerning a son's struggle to come out to his family. That was made into a TV movie in the early 80's with Martin Sheen as the father and even at that time it was pretty stale. Laura wrote about "explosive" topics, which was used on book jackets to describe her works, but on hindsight they do not hold up well at all. To be kinder, though, maybe they served their purpose in the moment.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Last night I saw the classic World War II movie "30 Seconds Over Tokyo"

I’m not a big war movie guy in general but I’ve always wanted to see that one.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I also think Gentlemen's Agreement is terrible. The idea isn't, but it's not executed properly. We're supposed to feel so high minded toward the Peck character that he's going to put himself through this anti-semitic discrimination to shine a light on it. Wouldn't this movie be so much better if we, the audience, didn't know that's what he was doing until later on? That we, ourselves, discover this instead of it being spoon-fed to us. No, I can't abide this film.

I think that film is the worst of the 5 films nominated for Best Picture that year, which includes another film dealing with anti-semitism, Crossfire. The novel Crossfire is based on a book, which I've read, The Brick Foxhole, and was actually about another subject they wouldn't even touch in 1947 films, a gay-bashing. It was changed to anti-semitism for the film. It's quite good.

The author of the Gentlemen's Agreement novel, Laura Hobson, wrote another heavy handed novel in 1975, concerning a son's struggle to come out to his family. That was made into a TV movie in the early 80's with Martin Sheen as the father and even at that time it was pretty stale. Laura wrote about "explosive" topics, which was used on book jackets to describe her works, but on hindsight they do not hold up well at all. To be kinder, though, maybe they served their purpose in the moment.

Without a doubt, I think "Crossfire" is a better film than "Gentleman's Agreement". Matter of fact, similar to "Going My Way" in comparison to other films from that same year of 1944, there were several films superior to "Going My Way" which won Best Picture in 1945. The same thing happened in 1947 with "Gentleman's Agreement", when several films from that same year of release were and still are superior to it.

If you want to see a movie from that film era that really hit the subject matter of bigotry hard then again I recommend "No Way Out" filmed in 1949, by Joseph Mankiewicz and released in 1950. He shot this movie between "A Letter to Three Wives" and "All About Eve". No Way Out was so incendiary that it wasn't released in the South and for many years had limited TV showings due to the number of racial insults used in the film. Hell, Quentin Tarantino must have been inspired by this movie with its use of the "N" word. As Eddie Muller stated on the audio commentary, it's really hard to believe that this movie was released in 1950, when this country wasn't ready to deal with its own issues after defeating Hitler and fascism. I could only imagine how audiences reacted to watching this film in 1950, no wonder it was a box office failure. I wish I could time drop some of us back to those days to educate you how bad it was for a number of people because of their race, ethnicity, gender, sex orientation and religion. It was really, really horrible for large segments of people. In the 1970's, I was actually in shock, when I watched this film for the first time as I wasn't expecting such shocking dialogue coming out of the mouth of Richard Widmark. It's ironic that both, Widmark and Robert Ryan can play such bigoted characters so well which was the complete opposite of both men in real life. Ryan in "Crossfire" and "Odds Against Tomorrow" was excellent and I highly recommend both films.

 

[Jeffrey D]

Without a doubt, I think "Crossfire" is a better film than "Gentleman's Agreement". Matter of fact, similar to "Going My Way" in comparison to other films from that same year of 1944, there were several films superior to "Going My Way" which won Best Picture in 1945. The same thing happened in 1947 with "Gentleman's Agreement", when several films from that same year of release were and still are superior to it.

If you want to see a movie from that film era that really hit the subject matter of bigotry hard then again I recommend "No Way Out" filmed in 1949, by Joseph Mankiewicz and released in 1950. He shot this movie between "A Letter to Three Wives" and "All About Eve". No Way Out was so incendiary that it wasn't released in the South and for many years had limited TV showings due to the number of racial insults used in the film. Hell, Quentin Tarantino must have been inspired by this movie with its use of the "N" word. As Eddie Muller stated on the audio commentary, it's really hard to believe that this movie was released in 1950, when this country wasn't ready to deal with its own issues after defeating Hitler and fascism. I could only imagine how audiences reacted to watching this film in 1950, no wonder it was a box office failure. I wish I could time drop some of us back to those days to educate you how bad it was for a number of people because of their race, ethnicity, gender, sex orientation and religion. It was really, really horrible for large segments of people. In the 1970's, I was actually in shock, when I watched this film for the first time as I wasn't expecting such shocking dialogue coming out of the mouth of Richard Widmark. It's ironic that both, Widmark and Robert Ryan can play such bigoted characters so well which was the complete opposite of both men in real life. Ryan in "Crossfire" and "Odds Against Tomorrow" was excellent and I highly recommend both films.

Surprising that No Way Out got released- I’ve heard the “production code” was very strict about language, sex and other adult issues in films.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Surprising that No Way Out got released- I’ve heard the “production code” was very strict about language, sex and other adult issues in films.

Yeah, I don't know how Zanuck and Mankiewicz got this film released as is. I guess the production code only cared about is showing sexual innuendo and violence.