Great Movies marred by supporting story/cast (1 Viewer)

[Agee Bassett]

I always figured it was a "blind" for the recently-imposed Production Code, to distract from the fact that the Bros. had toned down none of their gleeful flaunting of the social order.
As for the topic at hand, don't get me started.

 

[Seth Paxton]

But can't we pre-suppose that this movie is now what its creator intended?

No. After spending so much time putting it together originally, its not like FFC could say that he didn't have a chance to present his vision. Also, FFC did not try to pawn the film off as the "correct" version of the film, just a new take on it, thus the title "AN: Redux". I've never heard anything like FFC saying this is "finally his vision" or some other BS.

 

[SteveP]

The 1954 version of A STAR IS BORN was NOT roadshown-- which is why its three hour running time proved such a problem.

 

[Seth Paxton]

For example, while I like Uma Thurman in general, when I saw Gattaca I sometimes wondered to myself why she was in the movie except to be a love interest for Ethan Hawke.

I thought it was obvious. She also represents the sort of person being pushed down by his "cheating". She plays by the rules while he circumvents them. It makes the story much more realistic in that there is no "absolute good" as films often like to portray. We can perhaps agree that the discrimination against Hawke is unfounded, but we also have to acknowledge that he still isn't the only person being discriminated against and probably isn't even the hardest working or most deserving.



As for Kwai, again I thought the romance was not just some subplot for romance, but rather a serious point that Holden was a slacker pre-disposed to cheating the system himself, in his case to get the easy life. Perhaps not slacker exactly, but definately a selfish individual.

That subplot gives the narrative conflict regarding Holden's return to the jungle. It's not just in there to "bring in the ladies" or something.


Sometimes romantic subplots are just thrown in, but I don't think either of these films are the case.

 

[Seth Paxton]

Die Hard would be truely, truely a much better film if it hadn't been for the idiotic police chief.

Yeah, I can agree that they really overplayed that angle. I don't think it was just his acting, but probably just how the character was envisioned by the filmmakers.
He does get that great line though about needing some more FBI guys or however it went.

 

[Scott Calvert]

Red River is one of my favorite westerns, but it too has a somewhat out-of-place love story.

 

[DeeF]

The 1954 version of A STAR IS BORN was NOT roadshown-- which is why its three hour running time proved such a problem.

It was premiered at full length in Hollywood before being cut down by the studio. This is what I'm referring to as a "roadshow." The shorter version is what was reviewed by the Academy voters, and probably proved its downfall (and Judy's).

 

[DeeF]

Red River is one of my favorite westerns, but it too has a somewhat out-of-place love story.

Yes, and this reminds me that I want to elaborate on my thesis, a little.

I think the courting of Vera Miles in The Searchers is a necessary component of the movie, to provide a time-line, and to set off the obsession of John Wayne as being unusual to normal, healthy lives. Life goes on, even during turbulent times. This was the point of the scenes with Vera Miles.

But I still think these scenes hurt the film, slowing it down considerably. Even if they were needed, it seems like Ford and his writers didn't care very much about these scenes, and begrudgingly allowed them to stay in the picture.

This is all conjecture on my part. I don't know how Ford really felt -- just how I feel watching the movie as it is. Would this movie be better without these scenes? There's no way of knowing. And of course, the movie is pretty great with them there.

 

[Andy Sheets]

From what I've read of Ford I'd make a guess that he actually pushed for those scenes to be in the movie. He was known for having a boisterous sense of humor and liked the idea of counterbalancing the darker parts of his movies with light-hearted romance and comic relief. I do know that lots of people have criticized The Searchers because they feel those particular scenes swing the movie too far in the other direction and disrupt the largely grim tone of the movie.

 

[Lew Crippen]

I always figured it was a "blind" for the recently-imposed Production Code, to distract from the fact that the Bros. had toned down none of their gleeful flaunting of the social order.

I actually think (as indicated above) that they really did tone down their criticism of the political, social order. The did manage to get in plenty of digs at the upper-crust, establishment, but never again the government qua governement.

 

[DeeF]

Interesting ideas about the Marx Bros. I'm not sure they were ever politically motivated, but when the work was written by Kaufman...

One thing you haven't mentioned that occurs to me, the Marx Bros. were pure vaudevillians, a medium that included comedy right along side magic, animal acts, and fairly serious musical numbers. These boys were hilarious, but they were also very skilled, virtuosic musicians, particularly Harpo. Perhaps A Night At The Opera is mimicking their vaudeville experience, more than Duck Soup, Animal Crackers, or Cocoanuts (which was an actual Broadway musical transferred to the screen, with songs by Irving Berlin).

 

[Lew Crippen]

One thing you haven't mentioned that occurs to me, the Marx Bros. were pure vaudevillians, a medium that included comedy right along side magic, animal acts, and fairly serious musical numbers.

This was want I meant when I mentioned ‘stage-tested’ comedy. It sort of got lost in an overlong sentence and actually was not that clear.

Kitty Carlisle, who played the love interest in ‘Opera’, mentions that the Marx Brothers refined many of the skits in that movie in vaudeville venues. But I don’t think that there was more vaudville background in A Night at the Opera than, for example Duck Soup. A good deal of the lines and skits from all the Paramount films had their beginnings there as well, at least that is my understanding. You are absolutely correct about Coconuts, but even here, I have read (sorry but I don’t remember where) that the musical was based on things they had done on the road.

Many critics feel that one reason the later movies are not quite so funny is that the brothers never got the live audience feedback on their lines and timing.

 

[DeeF]

An interesting comparison occurs to me: Jerry Seinfeld.

In the 80s, Seinfeld perfected a stand-up comedy act, in clubs and on television such as Letterman's show. He parlayed this funny act into a series, and used his own experience (and Larry David's) in live performing to inform the tone of the show (which was performed in front of a live audience anyway).

Now, apparently, Jerry isn't funny anymore -- he's lost the very edge that made him famous. Comedy is famously fickle: audiences move on.

The Marx Bros. were made famous by championing a vaudevillian kind of humor, which they brought to the movies. But humor in the movies moved away from skits and vaudeville, so the movies helped to kill the Marx Bros. Eh?

Well, vaudeville was dead anyway. Perhaps the Marx Bros. should have found television, like Milton Berle. I guess this is exactly what Groucho did. Groucho couldn't play parts though, except Groucho.

 

[Tino]

Far be it from me to defend Phantom Menace, but I'm pretty sure that it is never mentioned that he is born of a "virgin", just that there is no father.

Anyone feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

 

[Daniel DeLawter]

I wonder how Shmi explained to Clieg Lars that she was a virgin with a son?

He was probably like, "Yeah right, me too, whatever. Kiss me you sexy slave"

 

[Christopher P]

Definitely came to my mind...

THE CAINY MUTINY, it was like they were trying to tell the story through the eyes of the young Keith (?) but it only takes us away from the tension that builds on the ship and the remarkabe performances by Bogart, MacMurray et al.

THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI, Roger Ebert talks about it in his "Great Movies" section that the Holden parts with the hurse are a little out of place. They don't drag on, fortunately or bring the movie down, just take our minds away from the war of wills being waged between Nicholson and Saito.

I love ABC's TV-mini THE SHINING, except for the kid. That's nothing new here, but popped into my head. Blow your freaking nose!

I don't think Seinfeld has become unfunny, but I am sure getting back in the groove is difficult after being away from it for so long. Especially when audiences are used to seeing him with George, Kramer, and Elaine.

Chris