|
Post by The Cap'n on Feb 26, 2019 22:36:44 GMT -5
Last night I discovered Alone In Berlin (2016) on Netflix. It's about a working-class German couple who protest Hitler by writing postcards and leaving them in public places around the city during WWII. It's an interesting, thought-provoking film. Think about how oppressed this couple were to have to resort to this form of protest. That despite the inevitable futility and consequence of such an act, they were still driven to do it - to express themselves. I'm hesitant to say more and spoil the movie for anyone. After watching, I decided to read up a little more on the background. The couple's real names were Otto and Elise Hampel. In 1947 a German author fictionalized their story. This film is based on that novel (which was translated to English in 2009). It's interesting to note the differences between the true story, the book, and the movie, but again, I'm hesitant to spoil the story! That German author would be Hans Fallada, with the story being his novel "Every Man Dies Alone." I highly recommend it, and him, to everyone. (Never heard of the movie, though. Will definitely look into it.)
|
|
B.E.
Kahuna
Posts: 179
Likes: 131
|
Post by B.E. on Feb 26, 2019 23:02:43 GMT -5
Last night I discovered Alone In Berlin (2016) on Netflix. It's about a working-class German couple who protest Hitler by writing postcards and leaving them in public places around the city during WWII. It's an interesting, thought-provoking film. Think about how oppressed this couple were to have to resort to this form of protest. That despite the inevitable futility and consequence of such an act, they were still driven to do it - to express themselves. I'm hesitant to say more and spoil the movie for anyone. After watching, I decided to read up a little more on the background. The couple's real names were Otto and Elise Hampel. In 1947 a German author fictionalized their story. This film is based on that novel (which was translated to English in 2009). It's interesting to note the differences between the true story, the book, and the movie, but again, I'm hesitant to spoil the story! That German author would be Hans Fallada, with the story being his novel "Every Man Dies Alone." I highly recommend it, and him, to everyone. (Never heard of the movie, though. Will definitely look into it.) If you watch the film, I'd be curious to know what you think of it. Particularly, in how it deviates from the novel. My favorite scene may very well be the final scene.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2019 1:03:53 GMT -5
But beyond that, this movie really spoke to me because I grew up Catholic all my life and eventually turned away from it. Now I'm estranged from my dad who's a Biblical literalist who doesn't approve of my lifestyle. The part in this film where the fiery preacher and Bryan both alienate Scopes' fiancee really hit home with me. Part of me also would love to show my dad this monologue. What I really liked about the scene where the preacher damned Bert, despite Rachel's pleas, is that even Brady recognized how overzealous the preacher had become. He showed compassion for Rachel and preached for forgiveness. It's not right away that we realize that Brady became overzealous himself and took advantage of Rachel's trust in order to attempt to win the case. There had been a lot of alluding to the friendship between Brady and Drummond, so there was reason to believe that there was more to Brady's character. I did find it a little heavy-handed how they portrayed Brady to be such a gluttonous eater. Although, maybe that's historically accurate, for all I know. A few random thoughts: 1) There were a lot of good one-liners! 2) My favorite part of the clip you posted begins at the 6:13 mark when the lawyer objects and demands to know the reason for Drummond's questioning. Brady says the reason is that Drummond wants to destroy everyone's belief in the bible and God, but Drummond responds, "That's not true and you know it! The bible is a book, it's a good book, but it's not the only book." I love that, but that's a far cry from what I suspect the original response was (which included Darrow calling out "bigots and ignoramuses"). If it's true that the one exchange inspired the other, then they certainly improved it. 3) Unsurprisingly, I liked the ending. That Drummond embraced both books. Brady/Bryan is a really fascinating, multi-dimensional character. There's a lot of ways to interpret his actions in those scenes. Personally, I think his reaction to the preacher's fire and brimstone sermon was genuine. I think in that moment he realized the preacher had gone too far. Rachel, who idolized Brady and had nobody else to talk to at that time, confided in him. I believe that in those hours they were talking, he listened and comforted her sincerely. However, the next day, he decided to seize on that opportunity to exploit her testimony for the purpose of winning. The film goes to great lengths to show that Brady is a different person in private and before a crowd. Redressing the preacher is one example of how soft and empathetic he is to people when he's not on a platform. His gentle, warm conversation with Drummond on the porch is another--he practically admits religion is just a means of placating the masses. However, whenever Brady gets in front of a crowd--interrogating Rachel, on the stand, giving his closing speech, he gets carried away. Each of these scenes conclude with his mouth trembling and a look of self-awareness on his face as if he just realized he'd gone too far. I interpret this contradiction to mean Brady fed off the energy and adoration of crowds until he began to believe his own bullshit. These conflicting moments are a good representation of the real man, William Jennings Bryan's legacy. He's kind of a controversial figures in all circles and was so even in his own time. On the one hand he was the original liberal champion who helped redefine the Democratic Party, but on the other he was an unrepentant Christian fundamentalist and social conservative. He wouldn't fit into either of our modern camps. But even beyond that, I've read mixed accounts of Bryan's sincerity. A few authorities on the subject considered him to be a phony and/or populist demagogue who merely played to the masses as a way of obtaining power and prestige for himself. So, take that for what it's worth. The film seems to play both sides and the crucial scene comes with his wife tells Rachel there is no black and white, that just because he did something you don't like that doesn't make him purely bad and vice versa.
|
|
|
Post by The Cap'n on Feb 27, 2019 9:04:42 GMT -5
But beyond that, this movie really spoke to me because I grew up Catholic all my life and eventually turned away from it. Now I'm estranged from my dad who's a Biblical literalist who doesn't approve of my lifestyle. I know this is OT so I won't get into it here (though I'd be delighted to in the appropriate section), but that's interesting: whatever its flaws, usually Biblical literalism isn't one in Catholicism.
Sadly the Scopes trial has relevance for me, as my family mostly are literalists, too, and my mom can't seem to get through a conversation without a reference to the wrongheadedness of evolution, the Big Bang, etc.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2019 7:30:14 GMT -5
All About Eve and Sunset Boulevard both came out in the same year and explored largely the same themes (the dark underbelly of showbiz). I've seen both of them several times and would highly recommend either. But just the other day I discovered Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? and it's like the best aspects of both those movies rolled into one. Imagine Bette Davis (from AAE) playing a character who's even more creepy and unstable than Norma Desmond. That's your premise. For the moment, the whole thing is available on YouTube for free. This was my favorite scene:
|
|
|
Post by Beach Boys Fan on Mar 1, 2019 12:19:50 GMT -5
This is fun to see that you check the same films I did, Leni. & btw I do the same as you - write long reviews of films seen. I find it fun to review things. Some reviews can be checked at SSMB in movie thread,if you're curious. "What Ever Happened To Baby Jane" is MUCH better than "All About Eve", in the latter I COULDN'T STAND THE MAIN CHARACTER EVE HARRINGTON. Not fan of the actress either. Such ANNOYING VOICE TO BOOT, GOSHDARN IT.
Anyhoo, in "Baby Jane", it's such good tandem between Joan Crawford & Bette Davis (btw, just recently found that her name is said "betty", not "bett". Weird, isn't it? Not like she's special or something that Bette in her case must be said differently). They really showed good team in the film. Complemented each other.
The song's creepy, especially when she sang it as little girl (she, that young actress, could star in horror as murderous child).
Fun fact - the neighbor girl you see being joined by her mother watching old Blanche flick is real daughter of Bette Davis. Doesn't look like her, does she? & I recognized the guy at the beginning when 2 guys walk after screening (IIRC) of Jane's new bad movie - he played Rock Hudson's character's servant in 60s cult classic "Seconds".
|
|
B.E.
Kahuna
Posts: 179
Likes: 131
|
Post by B.E. on Mar 2, 2019 22:57:04 GMT -5
Topher Grace and Jeff Yorkes' 5 minute Star Wars trailer incorporating all 10 films.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2019 8:18:26 GMT -5
I was watching Alien and Aliens this morning. I love how, in the first one, you initially resent Ripley a bit. She's the stickler for the rules going against what we want to see happen in a movie (bending the rules to save people in danger or go exploring, etc.) Then over the course of the story you see firsthand why those protocols exist in the first place. In the second, there was a deleted subplot where Ripley's daughter died while she was in cryo-stasis for 58 years. This explains her imprinting on Newt (the little girl survivor of the aliens). This was only my second time ever seeing Aliens, and the first time around I unfortunately didn't catch that Newt calls her "Mommy" in the end. So adorable This is one of the more WTF scenes, and I appreciate how there are multiple ways you can look into it. Ash maybe not being programmed well for how best to subdue and silence an adversary. Or I've seen people theorize that Ash was mimicking the alien which he admires so much. Personally I lean towards the theory that the engineers who built these androids did it too well--giving them emotions and urges which biological people have--but with no way to act on said impulses. Put another way, Ash is sexually frustrated but without the equipment to do anything about it. The entire rest of the film and the alien design was specifically designed to play on sexual imagery and implication, so why not this detail? It's one of the best things about Ridley Scott in his prime, his sci-fi was not sterile, it acknowledged the psychological human undertones that exist in the real world.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2019 5:14:35 GMT -5
I was watching Alien and Aliens this morning. I love how, in the first one, you initially resent Ripley a bit. She's the stickler for the rules going against what we want to see happen in a movie (bending the rules to save people in danger or go exploring, etc.) Then over the course of the story you see firsthand why those protocols exist in the first place. In the second, there was a deleted subplot where Ripley's daughter died while she was in cryo-stasis for 58 years. This explains her imprinting on Newt (the little girl survivor of the aliens). This was only my second time ever seeing Aliens, and the first time around I unfortunately didn't catch that Newt calls her "Mommy" in the end. So adorable This is one of the more WTF scenes, and I appreciate how there are multiple ways you can look into it. Ash maybe not being programmed well for how best to subdue and silence an adversary. Or I've seen people theorize that Ash was mimicking the alien which he admires so much. Personally I lean towards the theory that the engineers who built these androids did it too well--giving them emotions and urges which biological people have--but with no way to act on said impulses. Put another way, Ash is sexually frustrated but without the equipment to do anything about it. The entire rest of the film and the alien design was specifically designed to play on sexual imagery and implication, so why not this detail? It's one of the best things about Ridley Scott in his prime, his sci-fi was not sterile, it acknowledged the psychological human undertones that exist in the real world. I'm not much of a horror fan but I watched Aliens with my son years ago and thoroughly enjoyed it. I remember Newt's "Mommy" remark but assumed she was just being appreciative, particularly if the subplot was deleted. Alien looks pretty good as well. (Your explanation makes great sense to me.) Maybe one day...
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2019 11:32:19 GMT -5
Last night TCM was doing an Ann-Margaret themed playlist. I got to see an old cheesy favorite, Bye Bye Birdie and this "new" movie called The Cincinnati Kid. Unfortunately I passed out before they got to Viva Las Vegas.
Cincinnati Kid was great though. It was a very unusual movie. The main character is clearly pretty down on his luck (living in a seedy part of town, playing poker with unscrupulous men, etc) but he's not so much concerned with getting out of his lot in life so much as just being the best poker player around. And he determines to do this by beating a big-name player who happens to be in town. For me, it felt like a weird combination of Saturday Night Fever (replace dancing with poker), The Sting (the depression-era setting and poker scene) and On the Waterfront (something about Steve McQueen's badboy relationship with a nice girl, and Karl Malden was in both movies.)
Ann-Margaret is one of my favorite parts in this movie. I only knew her as the precocious teenager from BBB and hard to get love interest in VLV. So to see her now as a loose, "bad" girl who goes to Turkish baths, cock-fights and makes moves on married men was very interesting. If anyone knows any similar roles she did to this, I'd love to see them.
The whole movie is building up to their fateful poker game, culminating in this finale:
Anyway, it got me to thinking last night...Id love to see a playlist of great poker films. These are the other two most famous poker scenes I recall from other movies. Can anyone think of any more?
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2019 11:54:10 GMT -5
Last night TCM was doing an Ann-Margaret themed playlist. I got to see an old cheesy favorite, Bye Bye Birdie and this "new" movie called The Cincinnati Kid. Unfortunately I passed out before they got to Viva Las Vegas. Cincinnati Kid was great though. It was a very unusual movie. The main character is clearly pretty down on his luck (living in a seedy part of town, playing poker with unscrupulous men, etc) but he's not so much concerned with getting out of his lot in life so much as just being the best poker player around. And he determines to do this by beating a big-name player who happens to be in town. For me, it felt like a weird combination of Saturday Night Fever (replace dancing with poker), The Sting (the depression-era setting and poker scene) and On the Waterfront (something about Steve McQueen's badboy relationship with a nice girl, and Karl Malden was in both movies.) Ann-Margaret is one of my favorite parts in this movie. I only knew her as the precocious teenager from BBB and hard to get love interest in VLV. So to see her now as a loose, "bad" girl who goes to Turkish baths, cock-fights and makes moves on married men was very interesting. If anyone knows any similar roles she did to this, I'd love to see them. The whole movie is building up to their fateful poker game, culminating in this finale: Anyway, it got me to thinking last night...Id love to see a playlist of great poker films. These are the other two most famous poker scenes I recall from other movies. Can anyone think of any more? I recommend that you stop whatever you're doing and rent/see 1964's "Kitten With a Whip", an Ann-Margret vehicle that doubles as one of the campiest psychological ever made!
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2019 14:54:36 GMT -5
@ghostytmrs looking it up, I see it was featured on an episode of MST3K. Well, I know what I'm doing tonight Thank you!
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2019 16:59:10 GMT -5
I think you'll love it. Also, George Sydney revisited the "let's have Ann singing against a blank screen" opening a few years later in The Swinger. Full disclosure: I'm a sucker for this type of thing.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2019 4:02:44 GMT -5
One thing leading to another the way it does, I came across this short silent film made by Louis Feuillade in 1911 called A Roman Orgy (or Héliogabale). Historically accurate or not, it's a fascinating watch.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Roman_Orgy
|
|
|
Post by kds on Mar 11, 2019 7:20:46 GMT -5
Since St. Patrick's Day is fast approaching, I wanted to shine a light on this lost Disney classic, Darby O Gill and the Little People. When I was a kid, they used to air it every year on St. Patrick's Day.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2019 8:18:13 GMT -5
One thing leading to another the way it does, I came across this short silent film made by Louis Feuillade in 1911 called A Roman Orgy (or Héliogabale). Historically accurate or not, it's a fascinating watch.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Roman_OrgyHeliogabalus is another name used to describe Elagabalus, one of my favorite Roman Emperors A terrible administrator by all accounts, but a fascinating individual to be sure. I guess this would be a good tangent for a thread like this, but what does everyone here think of silent films? I don't watch very many, admittedly. The only one I rewatch on a semi-regular basis is Fritz Lang's Metropolis. If it still existed, I would have loved to have seen The Great Gatsby from 1926 for curiosity's sake. Something about certain old silents like this one, especially those with pre-technicolor attempts at colorization are vaguely eerie to me. You know everyone in the frame is absolutely dead, and just something about the look and movements of the characters feels uncanny. Anyone else get that vibe?
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2019 9:12:13 GMT -5
I guess this would be a good tangent for a thread like this, but what does everyone here think of silent films? I don't watch very many, admittedly. The only one I rewatch on a semi-regular basis is Fritz Lang's Metropolis. If it still existed, I would have loved to have seen The Great Gatsby from 1926 for curiosity's sake. Something about certain old silents like this one, especially those with pre-technicolor attempts at colorization are vaguely eerie to me. You know everyone in the frame is absolutely dead, and just something about the look and movements of the characters feels uncanny. Anyone else get that vibe? Yes. It's like finding yourself in a haunted house. Everyone looks like a ghost! I watched Metropolis years ago. And later I saw a big chunk with your USA soundtrack and actually made my one remark to you at Smiley about it. I'm afraid my favourite silent film isn't entirely silent. I've ruined people's entire weekends laughing about one scene in particular in Chaplin's Modern Times: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Times_(film)
|
|
|
Post by lizzielooziani on Mar 11, 2019 9:37:35 GMT -5
There are some wonderful silent movies out there. I think modern audiences would enjoy Buster Keaton in Sherlock, Jr., or Harold Lloyd in Safety Last.
As for Chaplin, he had a number of great silent films. Shorts such as Easy Street, longer shorts like A Dog's Life or the wonderful WWI Shoulder Arms. Features such as The Kid, The Circus, The Gold Rush. City Lights has a bit of gibberish sound at the very beginning, and one of the most emotionally charged endings of any movie. And Modern Times shows great chemistry between Chaplin and Paulette Goddard, his then wife.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2019 10:25:35 GMT -5
There are some wonderful silent movies out there. I think modern audiences would enjoy Buster Keaton in Sherlock, Jr., or Harold Lloyd in Safety Last. As for Chaplin, he had a number of great silent films. Shorts such as Easy Street, longer shorts like A Dog's Life or the wonderful WWI Shoulder Arms. Features such as The Kid, The Circus, The Gold Rush. City Lights has a bit of gibberish sound at the very beginning, and one of the most emotionally charged endings of any movie. And Modern Times shows great chemistry between Chaplin and Paulette Goddard, his then wife. I'll say this, the few number of silent comedies I've seen had me laughing out loud where modern comedies usually just make me smile or lightly chuckle once or twice at best. (Even if I appreciate the humor, I just rarely laugh out loud at movies )
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2019 10:48:00 GMT -5
I'll say this, the few number of silent comedies I've seen had me laughing out loud where modern comedies usually just make me smile or lightly chuckle once or twice at best. (Even if I appreciate the humor, I just rarely laugh out loud at movies ) The last time I laughed out loud (read: was in hysterics almost from start to finish) at the cinema was during The Death of Stalin. It may say something about my sense of humour but I cannot recommend that film strongly enough.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2019 11:05:58 GMT -5
I'll say this, the few number of silent comedies I've seen had me laughing out loud where modern comedies usually just make me smile or lightly chuckle once or twice at best. (Even if I appreciate the humor, I just rarely laugh out loud at movies ) The last time I laughed out loud (read: was in hysterics almost from start to finish) at the cinema was during The Death of Stalin. It may say something about my sense of humour but I cannot recommend that film strongly enough. Ive been meaning to see that. With Steve Buscemi as Khrushchev right? Stalin himself is just so ridiculously hardcore that his own life is full of funny anecdotes if you can forget the gruesome atrocities he's responsible for. As an example, the way he died with bodyguards outside who thought something might be wrong, but were too scared to disturb their boss. As a result, he died where quick action might have saved his life. Another example is how everyone was too scared to be the first to stop clapping whenever he gave a speech, so they had to start ringing a bell to signal to the audience it was safe to stop. This insane megalomaniac should never have been trusted with any position of power, and here he was scaring a whole country so badly over trivial things like that.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2019 13:09:05 GMT -5
The last time I laughed out loud (read: was in hysterics almost from start to finish) at the cinema was during The Death of Stalin. It may say something about my sense of humour but I cannot recommend that film strongly enough. Ive been meaning to see that. With Steve Buscemi as Khrushchev right? Stalin himself is just so ridiculously hardcore that his own life is full of funny anecdotes if you can forget the gruesome atrocities he's responsible for. As an example, the way he died with bodyguards outside who thought something might be wrong, but were too scared to disturb their boss. As a result, he died where quick action might have saved his life. Another example is how everyone was too scared to be the first to stop clapping whenever he gave a speech, so they had to start ringing a bell to signal to the audience it was safe to stop. This insane megalomaniac should never have been trusted with any position of power, and here he was scaring a whole country so badly over trivial things like that. Didn't they have buckets of salted water standing around to bathe hands that were raw and bleeding from clapping?! Yes indeed, Steve B. And Michael Palin as Molotov. The one that slays me in the film is Malenkov! The composer Dmitri Shostakovich, who miraculously survived those years (Stalin was a film buff and Shosti wrote lots of great film music), has a lot to say about Stalin in the book Testimony and elsewhere. What a nightmare!
|
|
|
Post by AGD on Mar 11, 2019 15:16:24 GMT -5
There's much more to silent movies than just the comedies. Murnau's Sunrise (1927) is one of the most visually sumptuous films I've ever seen.
|
|
|
Post by jay on Mar 12, 2019 0:22:47 GMT -5
There's much more to silent movies than just the comedies. Murnau's Sunrise (1927) is one of the most visually sumptuous films I've ever seen. Indeed. Anything by Murnau, Fritz Lang, Georges Melies, or Segunda de Chomon must be seen at least once before you die.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2019 4:10:31 GMT -5
There's much more to silent movies than just the comedies. Murnau's Sunrise (1927) is one of the most visually sumptuous films I've ever seen. Indeed. Anything by Murnau, Fritz Lang, Georges Melies, or Segunda de Chomon must be seen at least once before you die. Sunrise is on YouTube--along with this excerpt. Oh, if only there were twice as many hours in the day. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunrise:_A_Song_of_Two_Humans
|
|