Track the Films You Watch (2007) (1 Viewer)

[Pete York]

The Bachelor and the Bobby-Soxer (1947) Dir: Irving Reis

Silly lark of a film that never rises above the material, despite the excellent cast. Cary Grant plays the titular bachelor, a playboy-type who through a wacky misunderstanding will maybe, just maybe, learn what real love is. Yes, even by this time this was a role Grant could’ve sleepwalked through, but he remains his ever charming, likeable self. Is he simply playing ‘Cary Grant’, the screen persona often co-credited to Leo McCarey? Probably, but then it would only be natural to take a different tact on say, a Hitchcock film, as opposed to extremely light fare like this or Mr. Blandings.

The adorable Shirley Temple is the bobby-soxer, the oh-so-mature-for-her-age 17-year-old Susan Turner, whose sneaking into the apartment of Grant’s Richard Nugent (he’s an artist, she wants to model for him), where she’s caught, begins the sequence of his unfortunate events. Faced with jail time, Nugent is asked by Judge Margaret Turner (Myrna Loy), who just happens to be the girl’s older sister, to instead date Susan until her crush on him ends. If you think that sometime during this process Loy and Grant fall in love, well, I don’t want to give it away but you just may be on the right track.

It’s not a great role for Loy, she rarely has any comedic moments, and the plausibility of her being Shirley Temple’s older sister is so stretched that even Robert ‘See No Evil’ Osborne commented on it after this particular showing on TCM. Rudy Vallee plays her square, would-be but no-hope beau. Ray Collins and Harry Davenport also add their familiar excellent support.

While I like plenty of films based on goofy premises, the difference here is that The Bachelor and the Bobby-Soxer is never more than mildly amusing, despite its pedigree as an Oscar®-winner for best screenplay. The best bit is Grant acting like a ‘hip’ teenager in order to make a bad impression on Susan’s staid family (and have them call the dating off, I suppose). The other big comic scenes (the picnic, the dinner at the club) were either mediocre slapstick or had no laughs.

Hardly essential, but fine for fans of Grant.

:star: :star: out of 4

 

[Joe Karlosi]

It Happened at the World's Fair (1963) :star::star::star:

For me, this is one of Elvis' more enjoyable early-'60s "formula" films, partly because at this point it was still early enough that Presley still seems to pretty much have his heart in it and is not bored by it all. He's an out-of-work pilot named Mike who finds himself saddled with babysitting a sweet little girl (Vicki Tui - very cute and a fine little actress) at the 1962 Seattle World's Fair when her dad drops her off and disappears. While seeing the sights, Elvis makes the acquaintance of a lovely nurse whom he keeps trying to snare, and this necessitates a hilarious and oft-cited scene with a very young Kurt Russell as a kid at the fair who agrees to kick Elvis hard in the shin for a quarter; it's a short sequence but it's a lot of fun, and quite ironic since Russell would wind up playing Presely himself in a 1977 TV movie. It's got laughs, romance, and also some of the best trademark Elvis fist-fighting (it's amazing to me that he would be allowed to do his own stunts in these movies where he could easily have gotten injured). Oh yeah -- and there are more songs -- quite a few of them, actually -- but only "One Broken Heart For Sale" was of moderate interest for me.

 

[Mario Gauci]

I had the pleasure of watching this one as part of TCM's "Silent Sundays" while I was in Hollywood in late 2005-early 2006. I don't really know why Warners (I suppose) keep sitting on the Silent gems in their possession and don't release them on DVD a few every year...which makes one miss not having TCM all the more! And then there are those who have it and don't watch it:frowning:!! The injustice, the injustice...

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Yeah, I know. It's almost as much of a waste as owning so many DVDs and VHS tapes in our own personal libraries and not watching those.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Mr. Hex (1946) :star::star:1/2

Leo Gorcey learns how to hypnotize Huntz Hall into thinking he's a great fighter with the strength of 10 men who can beat anyone in the ring. They intend to use this power to raise money to help a girl they know, but trouble brews when a rival group of thugs use their own "Evil Eye" hexter to try and defuse Huntz.

I dusted my old VHS dupe off because I hadn't seen it in a long time and I wanted to reacquaint myself with it in light of this being the one Bowery Boys film that Warner is having problems with in locating decent elements for a DVD release. I wondered if it's that good an entry in the series just in case WB has to skip over it in their BB collection. It turned out to be a routine yet moderately enjoyable-enough offering from the boys, and so it would be a title that will be missed a tad. My copy was taped off TV many years ago and by today's standards the 16mm print, while watchable, was quite light and washed out. But at least I didn't see any glaring marks, imperfections, burns, or splices. So I'm betting that Warner should be able to turn up a decent print themselves at one time or another.

Girls! Girls! Girls! (1962) :star::star:

"Boats! Boats! Boats!" might have been a more appropriate title for this rather lackluster Elvis feature, one of those formula films that were a dime a dozen. He plays a fisherman who loves being out on the ocean and begins to despair when he learns that his adoptive parents are selling their boats because they must move to a dry climate for health reasons. Nothing very interesting occurs throughout, and Presley is involved in at least three rather embarrassing songs: most notorious is perhaps the silly "Song of the Shrimp", along with a cringe-worthy rhumba in an apartment called "The Walls Have Ears", and a ridiculous singalong called "Earth Boy" which Elvis sings along with with two little Asian girls (their sister would later star with Elvis in the much better IT HAPPEND AT THE WORLD'S FAIR). But at least there is also the decent rocker "I Don't Wanna Be Tied" and especially Elvis' big hit "Return to Sender" to enjoy. It's s a rare opportunity to see him perform the latter classic in a movie, and I'd say it's the best two minutes of the entire film.

 

[george kaplan]

The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie

I have my review in the S&S thread. Has it's moments, but it's no Exterminating Angel :frowning:

 

[Mario Gauci]

You're telling me! Just imagine how worse the situation would be if I dedicated what little time I have allocated for film viewing mostly to revisiting the classics (because that's why I'm a film buff, you dig)!

 

[Michael Elliott]

Every little item I've been watching came from TCM so it certainly gets used but I agree with what you said. A lot of times you end up watching "fair" movies but you always get those gems that I wouldn't have caught otherwise.

 

[JohnRice]

That's the great thing about this forum. No matter how much dissent there is on virtually all other matters, there manages to be one subject which we manage to be in agreement on. Mario, you have demonstrated the type of "subtlety you wouldn't recognize if it brushed past you."

Having said that, even though I tend to be a fan opf Parker's films, I still haven't seen Mississippi Burning myself.

 

[Mario Gauci]

Now I know why MISSISSIPPI BURNING lost out on all of the major Oscars - not enough eligible Academy voters saw it back in 1988!

 

[Michael Elliott]

Back to what Mario said:

I honestly try to do revisits but there's just way too much stuff out there to be seen. I tend to think I've seen a lot of movies yet there's always something new coming on TCM or various foreign films I need to catch up on so that doesn't really allow me to watch a certain film fifteen times anymore. One or two of my favorite Universal horror films is one thing but with all the new viewings I simply can't start from the beginning and watch EVERY Universal film. It's been even worse since TCM just bought the Columbia titles and rumor has it that they're about to buy a couple other studio's titles.

With that said, it's not going to stop me from going to watch PSYCHO in one hour, which will probably be my 50th viewing overall and my second in a theater. THE BIRDS follows it and it's a movie I really don't need to see again but I'm going to since I've never seen it in a theater. I'm hoping it doesn't bore me like the previous viewings.

 

[JohnRice]

Was Mario mimicking you Michael? I thought it was someone else. The "you dig" should have made me know otherwise though.

The fact is, I spend a lot of time watching favorites, though very few of those are commonly referred to as "classics".

 

[Michael Elliott]

No, Mario's joke was aimed at someone else but I took the joke and made it more serious in regards to how someone selects which movies to watch. I keep track on my list of how many are new viewings and how many are repeats and in the last five years I haven't had too many repeats since I enjoy finding new gems.

 

[JohnRice]

I like finding new gems as well. On the other hand, viewing my favorites is kind of my version of movie comfort food. I seem to go in phases. Sometimes I am almostly entirely interested in the pleasure of visiting familiar territory and other times not. Also, from time to time, a new movie really grabs me and I end up watching it repeatedly over a month or two. That usually only happens maybe once a year, but a whopping three titles from 2006 had that effect on me.

 

[PatW]

A Guy Named Joe (1943) :star: :star: 1/2

This movie is well-worth watching for Irene Dunn's performance. Interesting to see a young Van Johnson. Otherwise, I didn't care for the film as much as I feel I should have.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

As far as watching films goes, it should all be about pleasure, as far as I'm concerned. Whether it's revisiting familiar films you like, or watching DVDs you've owned but haven't put into the player yet, or discovering new gems amidst all the mediocre first-timers, it should be all about having a good time. And that decision should be up to the individual, and nobody else.

This makes me think of a sideline... so many times I've heard people say "I'll watch any film," but I just don't buy that. Speaking for myself first, I won't just watch 'any' film; for example, I'm not about to see the new kiddie movie, UNDERDOG. I'm just not interested. I will also use my latest Elvis Presely marathon as a good example... if someone is not a fan of Elvis at all, why would he watch 30 of Elvis' movies? Or if he's sampled 6 or 7 and they do nothing for him, why bother with all the rest? I don't believe that people will watch "anything" or "everything".

 

[Holadem]

This thread has become a marvel of passive-aggressiveness.

--
H

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Hey there, Holadem, how ya doin'? Why haven't you continued tracking the films you've watched? Looks like you stopped on January 21st.

 

[PatW]

In the Line of Fire (1993) :star: :star: :star: 1/2

Clint Eastwood plays a burnt-out Secret Service agent who is haunted by his inability to protect President Kennedy oh so many years ago. He is currently on the detail to protect the President and gets involved in a cat and mouse game with a man played by John Malkovich who is threatening to kill the President.

This is a good thriller played adequately by Clint Eastwood. A tight script and good supporting actors make for an interesting action thriller. John Malkovich really shines as the assassin but he's great in most everything. I had a good time re-visiting this one.

The Satan Bug (1965) :star: :star: :star:

Entertaining enough movie involving a flask of lethal virus being stolen from a govenment facility. Adequate enough though its been done much better since.

 

[Michael Elliott]

I'm going to try and do something different with this next year. Perhaps save certain months for a certain genre, director or actor. I can do this at Halloween with the horror movies so I thought about expanding it throughout the year. Perhaps use Jan. as a film noir month. Use Feb. as a silent month. March could be a 30's month, April 40's and so on.

As for you Elvis example, it all depends on what someone watches. It would kinda be like someone wanting to watch a Lugosi film but starting off with the three Ed Wood movies, BL MEETS A BROOKLYN GORILLA and perhaps the 2 films with the East Side Kids. This really isn't a way to get to see the best of Lugosi. If someone wants to taste Elvis then I guess they'd start with JAILHOUSE ROCK and VIVA LAS VEGAS. If they wanted to try more then go to the next group and then watch his "bad" movies if they wanted them all.

It's funny but I just got back from watching PSYCHO and THE BIRDS and it amazes me that people would pay $5 or however much money just to laugh their ass off. I mentioned REAR WINDOW got some laughs as did several others but for the life of me I couldn't understand what they were laughing at. SPOILERS FOR PSYCHO A lot of people busted out laughing at the end when the secret was revealed. END OF SPOILERS I guess seeing a man in drag is just seen as funny today and some of the comments I heard after the movie were just downright stupid. The film still had an effect on the majority of the people there but the reasons for the laughs are unknown to me.

With THE BIRDS, the scene where the children were attacked had people on the floor laughing. Again, I understand one or two laughing but it really sounded like we were watching one of the greatest comedies ever made. Once again, I understand someone out of 1500+ people laughing but for the life of me I don't understand what would be funny about seeing kids being attacked by birds. I'm certainly not a fan of the film as my review will show later but I guess people just come to older movies to laugh. I'm not sure.