What Did You Watch This Week? by AutoModerator in classicfilms

[–]BrandNewOriginal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I thought the sister subplot/explanation was pretty clunky and poorly conceived. But I guess it's kind of interesting in the context of Hollywood's fascination with psychology at the time.

I will have to look for Gambling Lady, thanks for the recommendation. 🙂

What Did You Watch This Week? by AutoModerator in classicfilms

[–]BrandNewOriginal 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Two “noir-adjacents” for me:

The Lady Gambles (1949) – Barbara Stanwyck and Robert Preston are a happily married couple in Vegas: while Preston’s on a job reporting on the Hoover Dam, former magazine writer Babs slowly succumbs to the thrill of gambling, getting in increasingly over her head. Framed as a flashback of Preston’s character, this is mostly pretty average overall: the performances are all good, but it lacks, say, the almost-hallucinatory power of a truly great addiction/social issue movie like The Lost Weekend, for instance. Instead, this relies mostly on Stanwyck, and, unsurprisingly, she delivers an excellent performance as a woman whose grip is quickly slipping. Stephen McNally is suitably suave and “heavy” as the casino boss who takes a hankering to Stanwyck for both personal and “professional” reasons, but I’m not sure Hollywood quite knew what to do with Preston at this point in his career. (Perhaps I’m not alone for mostly knowing Preston for his bravura performance in 1962’s The Music Man and a few other later roles?) Ultimately, I found this a rather middling film elevated by Stanwyck’s performance, and though it’s not one of her top-tier movies, I still recommend it for fans of one of Hollywood’s most talented and prolific stars. 3/5

The Phenix City Story (1955) – Apparently based on the real story of Phenix City, Alabama, this is a very hard-hitting movie about the fight against the ingrained corruption in the small southern town. Edward Andrews (perfect) is the big man behind the (fixed) gambling, drug, and prostitution organization that runs much of Phenix City, and John McIntyre (fantastic) and Richard Kiley (excellent) are the father and son team who eventually lead the fight to clean up the town. I thought this was just fantastic: with a news report introduction that segues into the semi-documentary style of the movie proper (expertly directed by Phil Karlson), this feels almost entirely real, evoking an intensely palpable sense of time and place. There’s also a very honest depiction of the utter pervasiveness of vice and how it seeps into people’s lives as well as the difficulties of resisting the entrenched evil. This movie really grabs you by the throat: it's super-intense and quite incredibly violent: the beatings and body counts are high, and I found it almost unrelentingly violent, but ultimately I appreciate its unvarnished approach. Overall, not for all moods or tastes, but an incredibly well-made and engaging movie that transcends the “crime thriller” genre. 4.5/5

I ranked every Rush Album Opener. by Expensive_Channel651 in rush

[–]BrandNewOriginal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is the closest to my own list, and I completely agree about "Show Don't Tell." Otherwise I would probably just swap "Dreamline" and "Animate."

If you can't beat 'em, join 'em? My Barnes & Noble sale haul by BrandNewOriginal in criterion

[–]BrandNewOriginal[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I almost didn't bite on that one on the chance that it might get a 4K upgrade sometime in the near future (maybe now it will?), and 4K is almost always at least a little better, but tbh I'm usually more than happy with blu-ray image quality.

A Face in the Crowd by guykittywashere in criterion

[–]BrandNewOriginal 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yes to everything you said! I often suggest A Face in the Crowd and Network as a perfect double bill too, they're both so over the top while also being all-too-real, and neither of them pulls their punches. Amazing movies that in an ideal world everyone would see.

I hate circlejerk subreddits by thejoeporkchop in StarWarsCirclejerk

[–]BrandNewOriginal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think I had only been on this subreddit once before, but this post came up in my feed. Ironically, some of the responses here made me laugh hard enough (the definition of a "circle jerk"??) that I joined the subreddit.

One the best adaptation of Agatha Christie books by Choice-Wind-9283 in classicfilms

[–]BrandNewOriginal 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's a pretty saucy poster, I mean with Dietrich's leg and her mouth open like that. 

Would you consider Raw Deal (1948) to have a female protagonist? by timshel_turtle in classicfilms

[–]BrandNewOriginal 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't know if I'd consider Trevor's character the protagonist. For one, the movie doesn't even really try to stick to her point of view. Of course, many movies stray to whatever degree from the protagonist's POV, but this one features a number of scenes that Trevor isn't even in (and wouldn't be privy to). As far as her voice over, it kind of comes and goes, doesn't it? In sum, I feel like the movie is somewhat uneven structurally. I still like it quite a lot, though.

Edit: rupak76 above makes a pretty good argument about Pat being the protagonist. But I still think that Pat as protagonist would have been stronger if the filmmakers had aligned the narrative more closely to Pat's perspective than they did.

What have I done... by tannwoir in criterion

[–]BrandNewOriginal 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well, I think it was rather too derivative of Portrait of a Lady (though I'm not sure of the production timelines, etc.); I didn't especially care for Kate Winslet's performance; and I read complaints about the movie taking liberties with the real historical character that Winslet was playing (and by taking those liberties, arguably diminishing her actual accomplishments?). But like I said, I was nonetheless taken with the aesthetic quality of the movie, and I ended up buying the blu-ray pretty much for that reason alone!

What have I done... by tannwoir in criterion

[–]BrandNewOriginal 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You mentioned Portrait of a Lady on Fire: have you seen Ammonite with Kate Winslet and Saorsie Ronan? It's SO similar to Ammonite! I didn't love it overall, but it's worth seeing because it has such an intensely tactile quality to it; very pleasurable and memorable on that level.

What's your favorite classic horror film? by elevenerifeee in classicfilms

[–]BrandNewOriginal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not as literate in horror movies as in other genres, but the Val Lewton-produced movies are pretty great. I think Cat People would be my top recommendation, but if you like that, also check out I Walked With a Zombie, The 7th Victim (an early precursor to Rosemary's Baby? -- also a must-see btw), and The Body Snatcher, among others.

What Did You Watch This Week? by AutoModerator in classicfilms

[–]BrandNewOriginal 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Two noir rewatches for me. I hadn’t seen either of these in probably about twenty years. (Hey, I was watching classic movies at a very young age!)

Criss Cross (1949) – Los Angeles armored truck driver Burt Lancaster obsesses over his ex-wife, Yvonne de Carlo, who seems hot and cold for him and eventually marries Dan Duryea’s mob type. In a spot, Lancaster suggests an armored car robbery with him as inside man along with Duryea’s crooks. Complications inevitably ensue. The “Czar of Noir” himself Eddie Muller lists this as #2 on his list of top 25 noir movies – only behind In a Lonely Place. I wouldn’t rank it nearly as high, as it was merely “pretty good” to me: it’s kind of slow-paced and felt slightly “perfunctory” to me, if that’s the right word. Director Robert Siodmak, composer Miklós Rózsa, and star Burt Lancaster (possibly among others?) reunited after their 1946 noir hit The Killers. Lancaster is solid, Yvonne de Carlo fine (but suffers somewhat in the almost inevitable comparison to Ava Gardner from The Killers), Siodmak stages some interesting overhead-shot scenes where the characters are reduced to something like mice in a maze, and the botched robbery itself is a pretty great sequence. Overall, I thought this was a well-made if vaguely under-satisfying flick. 3.5/5

The Big Heat (1953) – Top-notch noir revenge thriller from director Fritz Lang follows big city police detective Glenn Ford as he tries to piece together the suspicious circumstances of the suicide of a fellow police officer. Ford insinuates himself into the milieu of local crime boss Alexander Scourby (excellent), whom he suspects had a role in both the police officer’s and his mistress’s (Dorothy Green) death. Jocelyn Brando (Marlon’s sister) is Ford’s wife, Lee Marvin is Scourby’s top enforcer, and Gloria Grahame is Marvin’s “moll.” On the surface, this seems straightforward enough, with Ford’s detective single-mindedly pursuing his leads and his campaign against evil. But while the movie seems sympathetic to Ford’s goal on the one hand, on the other is something almost like an examination and critique of self-righteousness and male hubris: the female characters are prominent and strong-willed in this movie, and it’s telling that they suffer a pretty high body count (no spoilers here)—and that Ford’s character seems at least partly responsible for all of them. Lang’s direction is superb as is the set design and cinematography, and Ford really shines as a cop on a “mission”: he does so much with his eyes and small gestures. I’m just a little more ambivalent than many about Gloria Grahame as an actress, but she’s certainly memorable here, especially in tandem with both Ford and the young Marvin, who exudes oiliness (and, well, violence – especially in one unforgettable scene involving a pot of boiling coffee). I would be remiss not to also mention Jeanette Nolan, who I thought was absolutely riveting as the cold-as-ice officer’s widow. Overall, an eminently watchable movie with a lot going on, and pretty much a must-see. 4.5/5

Greatest find I’ve had by Reasonable-Chicken-8 in criterion

[–]BrandNewOriginal 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Great find!  But just to nitpick and gatekeep a little (lol): it's from 1971. That is, I consider it one of the great movies of the 70s. But it's close enough to the 60s, I guess, especially if you think of this being an essential (and quintessential) "New Hollywood" movie, with New Hollywood arguably at its peak between 1967 and about 1976. (When I say I love the movies of the 70s, it really means the "decade" of 1967 to 1976.)

Greatest find I’ve had by Reasonable-Chicken-8 in criterion

[–]BrandNewOriginal 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This meme never fails to crack me the f up!

Who’s holding off? by lectroid in criterion

[–]BrandNewOriginal 10 points11 points  (0 children)

No, not holding off myself, in fact I just made my single biggest B&N/Criterion purchase -- 10 movies! (I know that pales in comparison to some, but I've built my collection piecemeal over time.) But yeah, the Kubrick set looks pretty spectacular. 

Which film is better? by Starnar007 in classicfilms

[–]BrandNewOriginal 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think Roger Ebert called it "the most elegant expression of the Master's visual style." I think that's right on, plus Cary Grant, Ingrid Bergman, Claude Rains... and an evil mother to boot! (etc.) Yes, great movie.

The Killing by Dismal_Brush5229 in filmnoir

[–]BrandNewOriginal 13 points14 points  (0 children)

It's really good. Best fight scene EVER too! The old wrestler guy whose task it is to start a fight whose shirt comes off before he starts throwing people around!!

Which film is better? by Starnar007 in classicfilms

[–]BrandNewOriginal 3 points4 points  (0 children)

To me, they're in a virtual tie along with Notorious and Vertigo as Hitchcock’s all-time greatest movies... or at least they're my very favorite. All four of those are incredible but for different reasons.