Going to go ahead and just say this
Man I wish I had Bulltt's gif-collection right about now so I could give an appropriate response!
your enthusiasm to see everything
Thank you. Yeah I'm kind of going through a renaissance where my fascination of film is broadening considerably. I think I've basically evolved from just being intrested in the specific content of films to being intrested in film itself, that is to say, filmmaking as a craft. Even films that I "dislike" I enjoy seeing -- just to see how they've done it. For example, I used to be thoroughly disintrested in Prohibition-Era movies, but now I'll watch them just like any other genre.
I started out being very intrested in B-movies. Specifically cash-ins. I think I've seen almost every
Conan The Barbarian rip-off and cash-in that's ever been made, excluding a few foregin ones that I cannot find a dub/subtext for.
That said, in my write-ups I only really write about the famous or otherwise noteworthy films I've seen. For example, currently I'm sniffing about the B-movie, poverty-row products of the 30's and early 40's. And honestly, of all the genres out there, this has to be the hardest one to get into.
The only real hidden gem I've found -- and to use the phrase "hidden gem" here is being extremely generous -- is
Invisible Ghost with Bela Lugosi.
and the playfulness with which you handle your own (rare) cynicism
I have a (rare) sense of cynicism? I've been called a cynic before but not a cynic with a rare sense of cynicism. That's rather cool (I think?). Neither have I been singled out as having a sense of playfulness about my cynicism. So... umm... Thanks, bro.
is the way I wish I was about movies. You're just that way by default.
Don't sweat it, I wished I had your analytical clout and introspectiveness (and your hair as well
)
There are worse things that the universe could've conspired to make you watch.
Oh the universe has conspired to make me watch that movie more than a few times.
It's apparently became the "I haven't seen this! Let's put it on!" film among the realm of my acquaintances for about a year now.
I've never loved that one. It's decent, but literally every other big Brando movie from that period (Julius Caesar, The Wild One, On the Waterfront) is better IMO.
Never seen
The Wild One.
Caesar I would rank just a notch below
Streetcar. Brando's performance in that movie is really interesting since much of his dialogue got cut -- yet he still dominates every scene that he's in just by force of presence. It's rather similar to Streetcar in a way, in that his body-language is so domineering that it does half the acting for him.
Actually. there is a slew of eye-catching performances in that movie. Louis Calhern whom played Ceasar gave an oddly humanistic rendition for such a larger-than-life figure. And James Mason is all "Gimme a Gawdamn Oscar bitches!" in his very James Masony kind of way (dat voice and accent). I night have to rewatch that one, actually. Feels like one of those films that could catapulte itself with a second viewing.
On the Waterfront was recently released on Netflix Nordic. So I've been meaning to rewatch it. But yeah I'd rank it above Streetcar.
Such an amazing movie, and Tracy rules. I actually did a compare-and-contrast a couple of weeks ago in my film class where I showed the students the opening scene from Up and then Tracy's ending speech ("And if it's half of what we felt...that's everything") and I was pleasantly surprised that most people thought the latter was the more moving and emotional.
Just out of curiosity -- do you ever get the suspicion that those pesky students pick the Classics in questions like these
just becuse they are Classics, since as film students they are "supposed" to pick classics?
(never seen Up btw).
It hasn't for me, either. I'll take Fear and Desire and Killer's Kiss every time.
Honestly never seen either of them. Despite Kubrick being undisputed GOAT.
See, this is why I've never really loved that film: Because that spring and that vitality is precisely what I feel it lacks. The narrative structure is brilliant, the cinematography and editing are on point, the script is tight as hell, but it just feels so clinical and lifeless, like Kubrick has created a blueprint rather than a real building you can walk into and live in the way you can his other films, even his other early work.
Hmm... thinking back to it, I think that with "spring and vitality" I was actually refeering to how briskly paced and well-put-togheter the narrative was. Not some wholesome, emotional reaction to the material.
That said, I wouldn't go so far as to call it clinical and lifeless (though I definitively wouldn't go in the opposite direction). The sexual power-dynamics for instance feels like something that is the fetish of a director rather than a skilfully crafted plotpoint. Like most of Kubrick's work the craftsmanship is a bit coldly handled, but there is definitively an identity lurking somewhere in that film.
The Killers is amazing, one of the very best films noir. The Asphalt Jungle is in the same boat for me as The Killing, though lacking Kubrick's craftsmanship, it's a step down. And This Gun for Hire isn't exactly off the beaten path, but it's a bit underrated and very good.
I was struggling with ranking these three, but inevitably it ended up as a "A beats B but B beats C while C beats A" type of situation. They're all just balanced so perfectly. I'll conciede that my love for
This Gun For Hire is probably boiled down to personal taste though.
No idea how you can label
The Asphalt Jungle as clinical and lifeless though. That final scene where they cut from the Police Comissioner talking about the inhumanity of criminals to a dying yet bull-headed Sterling Hayden driving home to his family farm is both a great climax and a great encapsulation of what the movie is all about.
You've got to watch The Rainmaker. And not just because it's Hepburn. Lancaster fucking kills it in that movie. It also sort of set the stage for his big turn in Elmer Gantry, which I also recommend but only after you watch The Rainmaker.
You should also check out his many pairings with Kirk Douglas. They were great friends and worked extremely well together. Whether they're on the same side or mortal enemies, they're a great onscreen duo.
Cool. I think I've only seen
Tough Guys with the two of them -- which was... allright.
Softcore porn director makes a B-martial arts movie that not only has some softcore porn in it (because why not?)
Ah yes, softcore porn, the unheralded benefactor behind the Direct-To-Video boom of the 90's.
fucking dudes up in a UFC knockoff called Terminal Combat run by sort-of-young-but-still-grizzled-and-nasty-as-fuck Danny Trejo? How can you not love it
Pretty sure Trejo was born grizzled and nasty as fuck.
Not in the least supprised that he was in it btw. Pick a straight-to-VHS title from the 90's and its a 33% chance that he'll be in it.
Fun trivia, Trejo also did a movie with Kathy Long, one of the commentators from UFC 1, called
The Stranger. Which is a rather avarage
High Plains Drifter remake.
Not only that, it's so ambitious that they set-up the cliche revenge angle and then say fuck that, let's make them buddies and have them take down Trejo. That movie was so ambitious and so ahead-of-its-time, and sadly, MMA movies still haven't made good on all it has to offer.
Hmm... I'm not sure it was so much deliberate ambition as it was showing off more of Ken Shamrock. Inversion of the cliche occurring out of opportunism, and all that.
You want to talk about some Martian shit, you're on a silent movie kick, you come up on one of the absolute top-of-the-line GOAT silent movies, and you "couldn't get into" it? That's seriously the coolest fucking silent movie ever made. The Heat-esque opening sequence, the crazy Hannibal-esque puppetmastery of Mabuse, Lang's incredible pacing. That fucker is like 5 hours long and it flew by. I watched it three times in a week and then wrote an essay on it for one of my Master's classes a few years ago. I totally fell under the spell of that movie. Metropolis is the big one in Lang's silent career, but Destiny and Dr. Mabuse: The Gambler are the ones I endlessly return to.
If its any consolation, I was as suprised as you are.
But yeah, I found it rather languid rather than expertly paced. I guess one of the things could be that I don't like it when Silent Movies are overly wordy, with very verbose title cards. I don't know... overall the
procedural of it all just didn't push my buttons for some reason.
Is this the wrong time to admit that I don't consider
Heat to be at the masterpiece level as well?
(it's more on the great-scale).
Out of curiosity, how much Lang have you seen in general?
Not that much actually. Pretty much loved everything expect Harakiri and Mabuse though.
Harakiri
M
Metropolis
Die Nibelungen Part 1 and 2
Mabuse - The Gambler
The Big Heat
The Tiger of Eschnapur
The Indian Tomb
I didn't love that one, but given how meh I've found a lot of Murnau (other than Nosferatu, which rules), I was surprised it was as cool as it was. Have you seen Phantom? It's not as good, but it's a lot more compelling than Sunrise IMO and it's got some comparable imagery.
Never seen either
Phantom nor
Sunrise.
When it comes to silent ghost stories, though,
The Phantom Carriage is where it's at
I really like
Phantom Carriage. It has this very naturalistic, restrained approach that is unusual among Silent Era films. I would definitively put
Nosferatu and
Faust above it though.
Haven't seen Genuine, but a few years ago (during the same kick where I first discovered Dr. Mabuse: The Gambler, in fact) I did see the 1920 version of The Golem. That was a bad ass movie. The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari gets the press, but there's a lot of cool German Expressionist shit out there.
Oh yes,
The Golem, that is another very cool, classical one. Rather reminiscent of Frankenstein -- though it never took off in popularity. Got to laugh about how Rabbis are basically Wizards though.
That's definitely one hell of a crazy movie.
That response should be mandatory whenever anyone mentions that film in any situation.
I don't think it's much of a revelation for me to say that I love Arnold movies, but this one has always been near the bottom for me. Not because it isn't awesome (because, come on, it's Arnold) but because nearly all of Arnold's other movies are so much more awesome.
Actually, for Arnold standards, I'd say its more on the above-avarage scale. It's definitively better than his comedies -- and stuff like Raw Deal, Red Heat, Eraser, True Lies, Collateral Damage. Commando is more akin to its level -- though even then I'd probaby place Running Man above it.
Ok, this is honestly creepy. Just a couple of months ago I finished this big essay on the origins of the action movie, and in the final section, I talk about early crime movies and Westerns and my two examples for the latter are Straight Shooting and Hell's Hinges.
(I also mention Shane, which I know you'll appreciate):
You certainly know how to advertize.
"for it not only subjects the myth of the Western to sustained interrogation over the course of its narrative, but also enriches the myth by virtue of its originality on the level of characterization, its “psychological flavor” providing a taste of “individuality”
Really love that summerization of Shane btw. One of the reasons why Shane is one of my favorite movies is becuse of how seemlessly it manages to make Shane out to be some mythical figure but simultaniously makes him so human through its psychological flavor.
Since I know you're one of the few people in here as nerdy as me, this is the relevant portion if you're interested (I also mention Shane, which I know you'll appreciate):
Yeah thanks for posting that write-up!
The conflict between the loner individual and the attractiveness of communal life is something that has always fascinated me in Westerns and Action movies. To go back to Shane (Becuse I *ALWAYS* go back to Shane when the oppertunity knocks
) another reason why I love that movie so much is becuse I think it presented this conflict in the most emotional manner yet achieved. Shane is the character whom
wants more earnestly than any other character to be re-integrated into a community, so it's even more tragic when he fails becuse of circumstances and his own sense of self-identity (this being a theme that the novel Shane is based on never really achieved).
Another movie that I think has a very intresting take on this conflict is
The Road Warrior. Mad Max is so emotionally traumatized that his reintegration is utterly hopeless. He fails completely in bonding with other people and reacts violently whenever anyone else tries forcing him to confront this fact. Instead, its the buffon side-kick that manages to reintegrate himself, find a mate which to love, and become leader of the tribe that he has integrated into -- all the stuff normally reserved for the hero.
Another thing I was thinking about while watching
The Man With No Name trilogy is how Leone almost completely ignores this arc. Eastwood is the ultimate Loner yet he never feels the need to integrate himself into a community. He is the superman myth -- completely devoid of such human yearnings. A rather intresting, drastic decision to make.
