NitrateVille.com

greta de groat wrote:THE THIEF OF BAGHDAD (Fairbanks version). Pretty but slow moving and not very engaging. I know i'm laying myself open for brickbats, but Fairbanks isn't my favorite star. I tend to find him overbearing and self satisfied. I like the Mark of Zorro and The Iron Mask, though.

Whenever I see THE THIEF OF BAGDAD I cannot help noticing the similar acting styles of Fairbanks and Felix the Cat. They both have a habit of freezing in a pose and staring at the events unfolding in front of them with a grimace on their faces. Now who stole that trick from whom?

greta de groat wrote:METROPOLIS. Interesting to see once, a few cool scenes but the rest is rather overblown. I don't seem to care for most of Lang's silents, my favorite so far was that early serial whose name i can't recall at the moment. I think he improved dramatically with sound.

The trouble with METROPOLIS is the infuriatingly harebrained plot. The images are striking enough. Have you tried SPIONE/SPIES as a Lang silent? I always think it has held up best. The serial is DIE SPINNEN/THE SPIDERS, by the way.

greta de groat wrote:All of Jean Renoir's silents--ok, i haven't seen NANA yet so maybe that one would change my mind. But from his silents iv'e seen i wouldn't have suspected that he'd emerge as a major talent (i love Grand Illusion)

NANA is superb and totally redeems Renoir's silents in my eyes, even the ludicrous SUR UN AIR DE CHARLESTON.

Those serious 60s British drammers, starring Chewy British Master Thespians--Becket, A Lion in Winter, A Man for All Seasons. Or just about anything with Richard "I am a Big Welsh Ham" Burton.

Fred

greta de groat wrote:

Harold Aherne wrote:
I don't see much appealing about Bringing Up Baby. Really unmotivated actions, two very annoying performances by the leads, and a general air of contrived pointlessness.


-Harold

I like Bringing Up Baby when i was a teenager but now find it excruciating. I think i kind of got ruined for screwball heroines after spending several years working next to a person who really acted like that. In real life it gets old fast. Another comedy that i didn't much like was Midnight, which creeped me out because Don Ameche's character came off like a stalker to me, so i didn't find that very amusing. I always much preferred Paramount fields to The Bank Dick and My Little Chickadee, and i still worship early Marx Brothers.

greta

Yes, BRINGING UP BABY is torture. Even Charlie Ruggles can't save it for me. Why anyone would want to spend time with either Grant or Hepburn in that one is beyond me--I wish "Baby" had eaten them both.

I like MIDNIGHT, though, mostly for Colbert, who's enchanting, and John Barrymore, who's hilarious. Maybe he couldn't remember dialog, but he didn't forget how to steal a scene.

STAGECOACH. Competent, enjoyable western but not the greatest thing since sliced bread. I was always puzzled by its reputation.

If you watch it next to the other big hit westerns that brought the western back in 1938-9-- Jesse James, Union Pacific, The Westerner, etc.-- you can see why it stood out, it's pure action, like The Road Warrior of its time, the pace doesn't let up, which is a rare thing in 30s movies. I would rank it behind a number of other Ford westerns overall, but I can see why it had the impact it had then.

Mike Gebert wrote:

STAGECOACH. Competent, enjoyable western but not the greatest thing since sliced bread. I was always puzzled by its reputation.

If you watch it next to the other big hit westerns that brought the western back in 1938-9-- Jesse James, Union Pacific, The Westerner, etc.-- you can see why it stood out, it's pure action, like The Road Warrior of its time, the pace doesn't let up, which is a rare thing in 30s movies. I would rank it behind a number of other Ford westerns overall, but I can see why it had the impact it had then.

Hence the problem with defining anything as a Masterpiece. Different strokes. I love Wuthering Heights. Stagecoach kinda bored me. Real Genius--now, that's a masterpiece.

Fred

And i love the hammy Brits! I adored the old Forsythe Saga, big hair and fishtail eyeliner and all. Just couldn't get into the new one. One of the problems is that i can't get used to this newfangled neo-method blubbering style of acting. Give me a thick slice of declaiming ham any day. If nothing else at least i can understand what they are saying.

greta

Arndt wrote:This is obviously way off topic here, but I think a lot of the iconic films of the nineties and naughties are real stinkers. I thought BRAVEHEART was hilarious, albeit unintentionally so. GOOD WILL HUNTING was excruciating, as was DEAD POETS' SOCIETY. How a capable director like Ridley Scott could have churned out THE GLADIATOR I will never know. And don't even get me started on NOTTING HILL or anything else with Hugh Grant in it.
And while I'm a great fan of the Coen brothers, am I the only person who does not appreciate (gulp!) THE BIG LEBOWSKI?

No, you're not on your own....I agree with all your post, especially regards Braveheart, which was roundly mocked here on release, but I do have one qualification. About A Boy. Hugh Grant is actually quite good in it.
Talking of nineties icons; did Kevin Costner actually ever make a good film??

Arndt, I am in agreement with you about both your general statements about American Oscar winners in the 1990s. I walked out on GLADIATOR in the theater..... and then when it won the Oscar I thought I might've been wrong, rented the dvd and turned it off at about the same point.

But what is the point of German cinema for the past twenty years or so? Do these things actually play in theaters, or do they just make the festival circuit?

Bob

greta de groat wrote:And i love the hammy Brits! I adored the old Forsythe Saga, big hair and fishtail eyeliner and all. Just couldn't get into the new one. One of the problems is that i can't get used to this newfangled neo-method blubbering style of acting. Give me a thick slice of declaiming ham any day. If nothing else at least i can understand what they are saying.

greta

See? One person's Masterpiece is another person's Thanksgiving Day Turkey. Which, by the way, we're eyeing Becket this year as our T-Day movie, the combination of Peter O'Toole and Richard Burton is irresistible. The margaritas will be as abundant as the round tones.

But back to the subject: any Bertolucci film.

Fred

Penfold wrote: Talking of nineties icons; did Kevin Costner actually ever make a good film??

Two. Both are baseball movies.

I just watched Becket again and it held up quite well, in no small part because Burton does NOT ham it up in his late 60s, Liz-and-Dick boozy way.

Nevertheless, I highly recommend prefacing it with a screening of "The Man Who Would Be King of the Popes."

Mike Gebert wrote:I just watched Becket again and it held up quite well, in no small part because Burton does NOT ham it up in his late 60s, Liz-and-Dick boozy way.

Oh man. I watched about a quarter of it recently. I didn't have any vodka in the house and couldn't continue. I'll admit, Burton didn't thesp as much in Becket as he usually did, but that's because he was battling for screen time with an even bigger ham, Peter O'Toole. YMMV, srsly.

Fred

Everyone,

THE GENERAL I know that many of you will hate me, and allot of people have, but It's no secret that in my opinion this is the most overrated Silent feature I can think of! It would not even make my top 50 list let alone the top spot! I will never be able to figure out what is supposed to be so great about it??? From my perspective Keaton made much better films. Certainly several that were much, much funnier. The gags are so sparse, and few and far between, that when I was trying to come of with a good 30 second motion capture on my own program, I had a very tough time doing it!

I consider the film a Silent-Melodrama drama rather than a comedy, and not even a very good one at that. This is part of the problem. For audiances in 1926-27 this picture must have seemed pretty "Old Hat" to most of them. If they went to the film it was Keaton, so they were expecting lots of laughs and didn't get them. Plain and simple.

I am afraid that I am very basis against THE GENERAL because to be Frank, I don't think it represents Keaton's own work let alone Silent Comedy as a Art-form very well at all! When I hear critics describe THE GENERAL as "the last great Silent Comedy", I positively cringe! Those folks must not have seen, but a scant few? This statement is completely absurd! What about King Vidor's SHOW PEOPLE, Chaplin's THE CIRCUS, Lloyd's THE KID BROTHER, and SPEEDY, or even Keaton's own STEAMBOAT BILL JUNIOR? Or even much lesser know films like Lewis Milestone's TWO ARABIAN KNIGHTS, or Marion Davies THE CARDBOARD LOVER etc?

I think that THE GENERAL is so highly revered mostly because it has been so frequently screened? Probably far and away the most often viewed Silent over the last 40 plus years! But that sure as heck doesn't make it the best! It's not even the finest film of 1926 or 1927, which ever year you consider that it came out! Far from it! I would go with SEVENTH HEAVEN, or maybe OLD HEIDELBERG? THE KING OF KINGS was released that year too! So where WINGS, SUNRISE, and THE PATENT LEATHER KID. To me there is just no comparison.

With what else was on the Movie screens the year that THE GENERAL was released it is any wonder that the film could not compete at the Box-office. I know that many Keaton fans will disagree whole-heartedly, but it's highly doubtful that very many of them have seen anywhere near the amount of Silent films that I have either?

I don't think WINGS is a good film. Saw it on the big screen recently and still think it was too long.

WINGS is good, but it really pales in comparison to THE BIG PARADE, or even SEVENTH HEAVEN. What did the print look like that you saw? Who did the scoring?

With WINGS Poor Mary Preston, (Clara Bow) gets sent home way to soon. Beautiful Jobyna Ralston's talent's are wasted. She is scarcely in the movie. The ending makes no sense of any kind, and the storyline, especially the love triangle is under-developed, and barely even there.

I like WINGS but the story-line is weak. The film is quite a different experience with the masterful Carl Davis score though. There is no comparison. And I actually do like the Gaylord Carter score.

Darren Nemeth wrote:I don't think WINGS is a good film. Saw it on the big screen recently and still think it was too long.

No good film is too long and no bad film is too short. I'm a Wings fan myself.

greta de groat wrote:I love a lot of the films mentioned so far ( i must see Citizen Kane a couple times a year), but here's a few of the ones that just didn't grab me.

STAGECOACH. Competent, enjoyable western but not the greatest thing since sliced bread. I was always puzzled by its reputation.

THE THIEF OF BAGHDAD (Fairbanks version). Pretty but slow moving and not very engaging. I know i'm laying myself open for brickbats, but Fairbanks isn't my favorite star. I tend to find him overbearing and self satisfied. I like the Mark of Zorro and The Iron Mask, though.

METROPOLIS. Interesting to see once, a few cool scenes but the rest is rather overblown. I don't seem to care for most of Lang's silents, my favorite so far was that early serial whose name i can't recall at the moment. I think he improved dramatically with sound.

LA ROUE. Ok in the mutilated 2 hour version, but at 4 hours i wanted to slit my wrists. Glad i didn't have to sit through 6 hours. There just isn't enough story for that much time, so we get endless closeups of Severin Mars suffering. Enough already! I think of Gance as the Erich von Stroheim of Europe but not as entertaining.

All of Jean Renoir's silents--ok, i haven't seen NANA yet so maybe that one would change my mind. But from his silents iv'e seen i wouldn't have suspected that he'd emerge as a major talent (i love Grand Illusion)

Though i've always enjoyed Potemkin, i agree that Eisenstein has trouble telling a coherent story and characterization tends to elude him. That's why i usually enjoy more those of his films with a really strong central actor or character like Nicolai Cherkassov or that cute old lady and the cream separater in Old and New.

I suppose i didn't give Lola Montes a chance by watching it on my computer, but i didn't think it was very interesting. I tried the French New Wave films in high school and haven't been inclined to give them a second chance, since i'm not convinced i'd find them any less dumb and boring now as i did then.

And there is always Salt for Svanetia.

greta

Jean Renoir's NANA was a box office disaster. It is one of the most annoying films ever. Catherine Hessling is so unappealing in her part beyond description.

For a better NANA, I invite you to listen this tango written by Cátulo Castillo with music by Emilio Barbato, directly based upon the Emille Zola novel, recorded by the Osvaldo Fresedo orchestra (composer Barbato was the piano player at the time) with singer Oscar Serpa for RCA Victor in 1948.

Cátulo Castillo (an authentic genius) managed to compress in 2.42 minutes that Renoir was totally unable to do in... 150 minutes!

http://www.esnips.com/doc/509de42b-f783 ... n-Lertora)

DANCE WITH WOLVES is a mediocre film because nobody ever dared to go and cut all of the unnecessary scenes. And that's a problem that the industry faces nowadays.

Darren Nemeth wrote:I don't think WINGS is a good film. Saw it on the big screen recently and still think it was too long.

Wings has a lot of good pieces, but it is waaay too long, and the relationship between Rogers and Arlen doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Perhaps a classic best seen in clips.

Still, how can you hate a film with a fleetingly glimpsed Lesbian kiss (in the Paris nightclub scene)

FrankFay wrote:

Darren Nemeth wrote:I don't think WINGS is a good film. Saw it on the big screen recently and still think it was too long.

Wings has a lot of good pieces, but it is waaay too long, and the relationship between Rogers and Arlen doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Perhaps a classic best seen in clips.

Still, how can you hate a film with a fleetingly glimpsed Lesbian kiss (in the Paris nightclub scene)

All I ever noticed in Wings was Gary Cooper. Rowr.

Fred

boblipton wrote:But what is the point of German cinema for the past twenty years or so? Do these things actually play in theaters, or do they just make the festival circuit?Bob

After having badmouthed the new German film of the sixties and seventies I feel I should make amends here. Some of the more recent output - and I say some! - are actually watchable and enjoyable. And yes, they are successful in the cinema in Germany as well as making the rounds at international festivals. DAS WUNDER VON BERN broke all box office records in Germany despite being a genuinely moving and well-crafted film. GOODBYE LENIN and LOLA RENNT deserved the attention they got. DAS LEBEN DER ANDEREN/THE LIVES OF OTHERS was a particular joy, seemingly coming out of nowhere. If you have not seen it, do! The late Ullrich Mühe alone is worth every minute.

radiotelefonia wrote:Jean Renoir's NANA was a box office disaster. It is one of the most annoying films ever. Catherine Hessling is so unappealing in her part beyond description.

Oops...I quite fancy her in this role (and indeed in any other role).
Where's a lewd emoticon when you need one?

Penfold wrote: I do have one qualification. About A Boy. Hugh Grant is actually quite good in it.

I agree. Nice film all round, I thought.

Frederica wrote:

Mike Gebert wrote:

STAGECOACH. Competent, enjoyable western but not the greatest thing since sliced bread. I was always puzzled by its reputation.

If you watch it next to the other big hit westerns that brought the western back in 1938-9-- Jesse James, Union Pacific, The Westerner, etc.-- you can see why it stood out, it's pure action, like The Road Warrior of its time, the pace doesn't let up, which is a rare thing in 30s movies. I would rank it behind a number of other Ford westerns overall, but I can see why it had the impact it had then.

Hence the problem with defining anything as a Masterpiece. Different strokes. I love Wuthering Heights. Stagecoach kinda bored me. Real Genius--now, that's a masterpiece.

Fred

REAL GENIUS!

REAL GENIUS earned Val Kilmer a lifetime pass, even for dreck like THE SAINT and THE DOORS.

dr.giraud wrote:
Hence the problem with defining anything as a Masterpiece. Different strokes. I love Wuthering Heights. Stagecoach kinda bored me. Real Genius--now, that's a masterpiece.

Fred

REAL GENIUS!

REAL GENIUS earned Val Kilmer a lifetime pass, even for dreck like THE SAINT and THE DOORS.

Agreed, and he garnished the lifetime pass with Top Secret. But to be perfectly honest, I really do think Real Genius is a masterpiece. It may not be High Arte, but it's the funniest teen comedy ever.

Fred

Arndt wrote:
The trouble with METROPOLIS is the infuriatingly harebrained plot. The images are striking enough. Have you tried SPIONE/SPIES as a Lang silent? I always think it has held up best. The serial is DIE SPINNEN/THE SPIDERS, by the way.

The Metropolis plot is a mess, but much less so the more complete the print (which is why I'm salivating at the thought of the more complete south american print being melded into the existing digital restoration.

And the plot wouldn't be quite so distracting had Gustav Fröhlich been a stronger presence.

and if you want infuriatingly harebrained, wait till you catch the UK musical version, by Joseph (You Light Up My Life) Brooks!

But Spione - THAT's a movie! Just about the most fun you can have watching a silent and top of my list as the film to show any newbie I want to turn on to european silents - hell, ANY silents.

The fact Willy Fritsch - at least until he shaves - is quite easy on the eyes doesn't hurt either!

Frederica wrote:

Mike Gebert wrote:I just watched Becket again and it held up quite well, in no small part because Burton does NOT ham it up in his late 60s, Liz-and-Dick boozy way.

Oh man. I watched about a quarter of it recently. I didn't have any vodka in the house and couldn't continue. I'll admit, Burton didn't thesp as much in Becket as he usually did, but that's because he was battling for screen time with an even bigger ham, Peter O'Toole. YMMV, srsly.

Fred

Part of the price of taking Jim to Cinecon is catching up with all those 60s epics I had successfully avoided for the first 40 years of my life. Becket was a recent bow to his wishes. I thought Burton was somewhat contained but God! I'm surprised there's a stone structure left in the UK after all the scenery O'Toole chewed!

Dick was also surprisingly subdued (next to his costar) in Staircase.

Light candles for me - the Liz/Burt/Rex Cleopatra will likely be under the tree next month. Is there a breakdown available of what Mamoulian footage (if any) made the final cut?

Gagman 66 wrote:Everyone,

THE GENERAL I know that many of you will hate me, and allot of people have, but It's no secret that in my opinion this is the most overrated Silent feature I can think of!

Don't worry. We don't hate you for that.

Seriously, I think The General is one of the most beautiful comedies ever made. Not the funniest by a long shot - but beautifully constructed and shot with the requisite Keaton set pieces and a plot where you really care about him and he *still* keeps his stone face.

And the fact that the story of The General took place in my back yard adds to the allure (The actual Texas is a block from my house, The General itself about 25 miles north of town.)

I know Mr. Roberts will never invite me to introduce a comedy film - and there are plenty of comedies I love because they simply make me laugh (Roach's Crooks' Tour is still high on my wish list for video and Pass The Gravy made me a life-long Max Davidson fan) - but the comedies I return to again and and again are the ones with more of an emotional core to them. Chaplin's The Kid, LLoyd's The Kid Brother and Keaton's The General are not the best features the three ever made, but they remain my favorites because I get emotionally tied up with the stories.

In the post-war sound era, Some Like it Hot and Young Frankenstein are high on that list, although, again, I will laugh more often and louder at a lot of other films.[/i]

Gagman 66 wrote: With WINGS Poor Mary Preston, (Clara Bow) gets sent home way to soon. Beautiful Jobyna Ralston's talent's are wasted. She is scarcely in the movie. The ending makes no sense of any kind, and the storyline, especially the love triangle is under-developed, and barely even there.

Of course she's barely there. She's the third wheel in the love story (the Franchot Tone role)

Arndt wrote:GOODBYE LENIN and LOLA RENNT deserved the attention they got. DAS LEBEN DER ANDEREN/THE LIVES OF OTHERS was a particular joy, seemingly coming out of nowhere. If you have not seen it, do! The late Ullrich Mühe alone is worth every minute.

Goodbye Lenin was excellent; funny, involving, and moving.....Capra meets Ealing in East Germany?? I have managed not tto see The Lives of Others, but will at the first opportunity; it must be due on UKTV soon....and how about Untergang/Downfall ??? Terrific performances......

Arndt wrote:

boblipton wrote:But what is the point of German cinema for the past twenty years or so? Do these things actually play in theaters, or do they just make the festival circuit?Bob

After having badmouthed the new German film of the sixties and seventies I feel I should make amends here. Some of the more recent output - and I say some! - are actually watchable and enjoyable. And yes, they are successful in the cinema in Germany as well as making the rounds at international festivals. DAS WUNDER VON BERN broke all box office records in Germany despite being a genuinely moving and well-crafted film. GOODBYE LENIN and LOLA RENNT deserved the attention they got. DAS LEBEN DER ANDEREN/THE LIVES OF OTHERS was a particular joy, seemingly coming out of nowhere. If you have not seen it, do! The late Ullrich Mühe alone is worth every minute.

Maybe my tastes are too plebian - or I only get to see the most creme of the creme, but my ratio of satisfaction with post-60s German films is much much higher than my level of satisfaction with Hollywood product.

Or maybe that's damning with faint praise, but some favorites off the top of my head:

Both Kaspar Hausers
Jeder für sich und Gott gegen alle (1974) - Herzog
and Kaspar Hauser (1993) - Sehr
(by the way, am I right in assuming the 1915 silent version by Kurt Matull does *not* survive?)


also:
Drei Tage im April (1994) - Storz
Das Boot (1981) - Peterson
- although I believe these were both for television and released to the cinema after the fact - I would kill for a subtitled video of Drei Tage.

Having fallen totally and hopelessy in love with Heino Ferch has increased my level of enjoyment of many of his films, especially:
Der Untergang - 2004 Hirschbiegel
Der Tunnel - 2001 Richter
and especially Comedian Harmonists (1997 - Vilsmaier) - Grrrrr!
Even though I've read it is far from a classic, I'd still like to see him in Marlene.

Even the less than classic moderns I've seen -

Aimée & Jaguar (1999 - Max Färberböck)
Lola + Bilidikid (1999 - Ataman)
are worth a look.

Even the silly
Männer wie wir (2004 - Horman)
manages to be a bizarrely amusing remake of The Bad News Bears.