Announcing the 2nd Annual "Watch That Movie" Night

Post news stories and home video release announcements here.
User avatar
Posts: 2451
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:48 pm
Location: California

Unread post by missdupont » Tue Feb 02, 2010 11:40 am

My review was posted 11:30 PM California time, which came up 12:39 i Nitrateville, which would be mountain time, not central time.

User avatar
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 5:48 pm

Unread post by florodoragirl » Tue Feb 02, 2010 3:34 pm

I enjoyed Foolish Wives very much - so much that I could kick myself for not watching it sooner. The character devlopment in this film was riveting - each one's complexities and nuances keeping me glued to the set and on the edge of my seat the whole time.

The dark storyline and watching Erich von Stroheim connive and seduce with his monacle and white miliary uniform made this and unforgettable film experience for me. When the movie ended, I felt stunned - a changed person from the experience with a completely newfound respect and appreciation for EVS. Thumbs up!

"They took the idols and smashed them, the Fairbankses, the Gilberts, the Valentinos! And who've we got now? Some nobodies!" -Norma Desmond

User avatar
Mike Gebert
Site Admin
Posts: 6127
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 3:23 pm
Location: Chicago

Unread post by Mike Gebert » Tue Feb 02, 2010 5:27 pm


How appropriate that The Doll goes to the person who watched The Oyster Princess. Thanks everybody who played along this year. Some really great writeups about a wide variety of films, I really enjoyed it and am definitely going to catch up on some I have and have never watched, such as Gretchen the Greenhorn and Redskin. Special hazard pay to Greta, for watching an entire serial and a couple of features on her choice, and the obscurity prize goes to Chris Jacobs for the Mexican movie. And of course, thanks to Kino for providing our prize again this year.
Last edited by Mike Gebert on Tue Feb 02, 2010 9:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“I'm in favor of plagiarism. If we are to create a new Renaissance, the government should encourage plagiarism. When convinced that someone is a true plagiarist, we should immediately award them the Legion of Honor.” —Jean Renoir

User avatar
Posts: 6251
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:01 pm
Location: Clement Clarke Moore's Farm

Unread post by boblipton » Tue Feb 02, 2010 5:46 pm

You'd never think you'd have to bribe anyone in this bunch to watch a Lubitsch flick, but I'm glad that so many good movies were viewed. I would have joined in myself, except I usually look at them as they come in, barring a big pile-up.

Thanks for the reviews, folks.

Life's too short to sit on our rears watching other people's work.
— Bob Fells

User avatar
Posts: 1848
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 11:48 am
Location: San Fwancisco

Unread post by rudyfan » Tue Feb 02, 2010 5:54 pm

Congrats Hartlett! :D" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank

User avatar
Jim Roots
Posts: 2901
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 2:45 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Unread post by Jim Roots » Wed Feb 03, 2010 7:58 am

gjohnson wrote:
Jim Roots wrote:
Just be patient with disc 1 and the first half of disc 2 -- Charley doesn't really get his feet until he starts making two-reelers.

Nonsense! The one-reelers are microcosms of Charley's world of farce and situation humor. His two-reelers are elaborate extensions of his earlier shorts and would not had been so perfectly concieved without laying the groundwork earlier with his one-reelers. That makes his one-reelers essential viewing historically and the fact that most of them are quite funny to boot.

Just saying...

Gary J.
That's more or less exactly what I said throughout my review: that we get to see Chase develop from the crude, plotless slapstick of the early Sennett films, on through the testing-grounds of the Jimmy Jump one-reelers, and finally blossoming into the amazing sophistication of the two-reel Chase masterpieces.

Far from discouraging people from watching the early films, my comment encourages them to stick it out, because it's worth it to see Chase's evolution.

Put the wine down, Gary!


User avatar
Jim Roots
Posts: 2901
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 2:45 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Unread post by Jim Roots » Wed Feb 03, 2010 8:01 am

Fix! Fix!

Conspiracy Theorists of America, Inc.

Posts: 653
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 4:56 pm

Unread post by gjohnson » Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:20 am

You said Charley doesn't get his feet until the 2-reelers. I presume that means you think he doesn't find his way until then - since he had his feet til the time he was born. Well, I look at the Jimmy Jumps not so much as experimenting at finding a form as a constant evolution of what he could get away with comedically. He would play with the shy, flustered character and then with the hen-pecked husband and then try the social go-getter. And he would continue this pattern into his 2-reelers after he dropped the Jimmy Jump name. Actually he was continually exploring his entire career. His talkies are a jumbled mixture of different comic ideas, themes and structures. He never really had a set-in-stone character as Stan & Ollie. His only constant was that his characters always had a penchant towards being flustered and public embarrassments.

And I do very well writing with wine, thank you very much.

Gary J.

Post Reply