A Few Words About While we wait for A few words about...™ Lawrence of Arabia -- in 4k/UHD Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Cineman]

I had also considered that it was odd how the scene changes abruptly after Lawrence's initial admission, but I think it is done for a reason. The real issue is that Allenby needs Lawrence in his campaign and therefore he doesn't want to hear any "truths" related to a troubling incident. Throughout the scene Lawrence keeps insisting that there is a confession buried within himself. Possibly it is due to guilt or that perhaps by admitting this horror he wouldn't have to go back to Arabia, regardless, Lawrence continues to push for the answer to be revealed. Once it is done, Allenby has to dismiss it out hand with the reprimand because he cannot be allowed to have an officer who enjoys killing. Each man has their own agenda: Lawrence to confess; Allenby to keep Lawrence in the war. This is why, I think, the moment is quickly interrupted as Allenby stands and inquires about the headgear rather than dwell on the moment. More importantly, the seduction continues with Dryden, Brighten, and even Perkins, praising Lawrence despite his admission. (It is interesting to note the composition of that scene, wide shot with Allenby, Dryden, and Brighten one side towering over a weak Lawrence.) The scene ends with this brilliant exchange:

Lawrence: Your a clever man, sir.
Allenby: No, but I know a good thing when I see one. That's fair, surely?

The more I read it--and watch it--the more I appreciate its subtlety and construction. There is a tug-of-war going on and, in the end, both man gets what he wants.

Yes, the exchange reveals that Allenby is willing to overlook just about anything, abandon just about any principle and ethic in order to achieve an end. Lawrence gets things done in service to that end. Therefore, Allenby wants him back at the front no matter what he confesses in that room. If anything, I believe the earlier scolding about how dangerous it is to "act on your own initiative" rather than acting on orders from above is the more cast-off line in the scene. I believe it was put there in order to provide cover for what follows in the sense that the filmmakers did not want to portray Allenby and the entire British military command as utterly unprincipled regarding the means to an end while the more intense and focused exchange between him and Lawrence immediately afterward would support that conclusion.

 

[owen35]

Yes, the exchange reveals that Allenby is willing to overlook just about anything, abandon just about any principle and ethic in order to achieve an end. Lawrence gets things done in service to that end. Therefore, Allenby wants him back at the front no matter what he confesses in that room. If anything, I believe the earlier scolding about how dangerous it is to "act on your own initiative" rather than acting on orders from above is the more cast-off line in the scene. I believe it was put there in order to provide cover for what follows in the sense that the filmmakers did not want to portray Allenby and the entire British military command as utterly unprincipled regarding the means to an end while the more intense and focused exchange between him and Lawrence immediately afterward would support that conclusion.

A good point. And possibly the "act on your own initiative" could be considered a throw-away line, but it also shows that Allenby is in charge, not Lawrence. I find it is interesting that Allenby opens the scene by reading a list of positive and negatives about Lawrence and then giving him praise ("You're an interesting man..."). But this is quickly followed by a reminder that Lawrence needs to address him as "Sir"--rank and who is in charge is being declared. As the scene progresses, Lean cuts to a wide-shot with both men on opposite ends of the screen, while Dryden and Brighten move their focus from one person to the other--like watching a tennis match. Good stuff.

There is one other interesting moment that I forgot to mention. After Lawrence says "I enjoyed it" he doesn't maintain focus on Allenby, rather he quickly looks at Dryden and Brighten to get their reactions. It's a revealing moment in that Lawrence needs to see what his peers think of him, rather than confront his shame by, perhaps, lowering his head (a weaker directorial choice, btw).

Again, the more I watch and study the scene, the more I appreciate it. Like any great work of art, the more you dig deeper into its core, the more riches you find within.

 

[Cineman]

Again, the more I watch and study the scene, the more I appreciate it. Like any great work of art, the more you dig deeper into its core, the more riches you find within.

Man, I just couldn't agree more (as if that isn't obvious by now ). For me, that second "No, something else" was the loose peel on the onion that got me digging deeper and deeper.

One could almost start anywhere in the scene to begin peeling back the layers to find more and more riches. I hesitate to bring up the way Lawrence begins his confession before these men; "Well, I, it's, uh, let me see, I killed two people, I mean two Arabs", to peel back a few layers and ponder just why Lawrence, of all people, would have put it quite that way at this particular moment considering how the previous two plus hours of movie time was as devoted as it was to his recognizing the equal worth of those people and his having taken a stand against his own cultural tendency to consider them less than people, just "Wogs", but, well, there it is!

 

[Chuck Anstey]

That or simply that "two men" implied the Turks he was fighting against and so he clarified he killed two men he was working with, i.e. comrades in arms and not "Well not men per se but Arabs".

 

[Robert Harris]

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2013/06/have-you-seen-this-before-the-quest-to-id-films-with-no-names/276577/

 

[Charles Smith]

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2013/06/have-you-seen-this-before-the-quest-to-id-films-with-no-names/276577/

Those sessions sound like a fine way to spend a day or an evening.

 

[Robert Harris]

An interesting examination of a genre from David Bordwell:

http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2013/06/03/sometimes-a-jump-cut/

 

[Robert Harris]

For those unfamiliar with the work of Kristin Thompson and David Bordwell, here's another superb piece from their site:

http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2011/05/25/graphic-content-ahead/

Always worth a visit.

RAH

 

[JoshZ]

For those unfamiliar with the work of Kristin Thompson and David Bordwell, here's another superb piece from their site:

http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2011/05/25/graphic-content-ahead/

Always worth a visit.

RAH

Invalid link on this one, FYI.

Edit: I think his site just crashed between when I clicked on the first link and when I tried the second. Now neither is working.

 

[Robert Harris]

http://www.filmpreservation.org/about/PR-2013-06-04

 

[Lromero1396]

http://www.filmpreservation.org/about/PR-2013-06-04

Wonderful news! I don't think Fox has an interest in a complete John Ford BD set given Twilight Time's recent release announcements, so it's fantastic to see some of his unavailable work getting released! An early Hitchcock and 2-strip Tech will be nice to have as well.

 

[Robert Harris]

Fox certainly gave Mr. Ford his due with this release:

http://www.amazon.com/Ford-Fox-Collection-Claudette-Colbert/dp/B000WMA6HI/ref=sr_1_5?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1370626973&sr=1-5&keywords=john+ford

He was such a prolific filmmaker, beginning in 1913, and making a move from his roots in Bison and Universal to Fox c. 1920. Three decades at Fox creates the problem that most people, even rabid fans, would find the compleat Ford too touch a financial commitment.

Between the availability of his Columbia, M-G-M and RKO work, we're actually in quite good shape.

RAH

 

[Charles Smith]

Good reminder. Is that set still worth acquiring? Or does the answer depend on how many of the films one already has separately?

The Murnau/Borzage box is a treasure.

 

[Robert Harris]

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/columns/history-legacy--showmanship/cleopatra-roadshow-engagements

 

[PaulDA]

Interesting article (though Montrealers might be miffed at not being considered "international" ).

 

[Robert Harris]

Interesting article (though Montrealers might be miffed at not being considered "international" ).

it's just that we, here in the Colonies, consider Montrealers family.

RAH

 

[PaulDA]

it's just that we, here in the Colonies, consider Montrealers family.

RAH

And that's mighty neighbourly of you. Merci beaucoup.

 

[FoxyMulder]

I don't want to start another thread to discuss this and since we use this thread to discuss every topic under the sun i'll post here.

I wasn't too happy to see a member's thread locked down and closed, i am referring to the film grain thread, even if it wasn't going anywhere fast i believe it could have been used for educational purposes with regards the subject matter and kept open, i also believe just because some members think the original poster was trolling doesn't make it so, we should have been keeping an open mind on all that and not reacting to it.

I am disappointed because to me this forum doesn't usually do things like that, usually it just lets the thread stay open and people eventually stop posting, i think that's the right way to handle it, closing threads is what other less liberal and more close minded forums do.

I hope this isn't the start of a new trend at home theater forum.

 

[Mike Frezon]

From the HTF Rules:

(The emphasis in blue is mine.)

Moderators
17. Moderator instructions. HTF moderators (also known as "administrators") are responsible for running the forum on a day-to-day basis and enforcing these rules. Please comply with any instructions from a moderator, whether those instructions are general or specific. Failure to comply with a moderator's instructions will have serious consequences.

18. No public disagreements. Anyone arguing with a moderator regarding enforcement of forum rules and guidelines or disciplinary action will be immediately removed. This includes "indirect" argument, where a member vents about a moderator's action being "unjustified", "excessive", etc.

19. Contacting a moderator. If you have an issue with or complaint against a moderator, raise it privately in an email or private message with the moderator in question. Do not, under any circumstances, raise such issues in public postings. In addition, before contacting the forum's owners with a complaint about a moderator, remember that the owners have personally selected and place great trust in their moderators and are unlikely to be swayed by someone who complains about a moderator without even bothering to contact him or her directly. Please remain civil when dealing with moderators, whether in their official capacity or in their ordinary postings as members of HTF. Abusive or disrespectful conduct toward a moderator will not be tolerated, regardless of whether it occurs in public postings or in private communications.

General
20. We make the rules. Forum rules and guidelines are not up for debate. This is not a democracy, but rather a private forum. Anyone openly debating these rules will be removed. In addition, anyone publicly challenging or "calling out" the forum's ownership or administration on the policies or conduct of the forum will be removed.

 

[FoxyMulder]

I wasn't completely aware of those rules when posting thus i offer my apologies, delete the post, i have PMed both you and Robert regarding the thread, once again i am sorry for breaking the rules, if you want you can delete both of my posts, this one and the other since they offer nothing to the thread.