Classic cinema - thoughts and questions

bearfan said:
Thanks for the suggestions.  I have seen a few of those (Mr. Smith, Wonderful Life, Can't Take it With You, and Harvey).  I'll have to pick up the rest.

You sure need to do some catching up indeed. If Stewart is one of your favourite actors, you've got another thing comin'!
:)

Perun said:
There are a few DEFA westerns (dubbed "Indianerfilme") about American Indian tribes that were produced in rivalry to both American westerns and West German Karl May films that were wildly popular in the sixties. Some of those are astonishing in their historical accuracy, although you can probably imagine the film makers perferred topics about the Indians being victims to American imperialism. They are quite lavishly produced and better than you'd think.

Sounds very good. Do you have a title or two?

Perun said:
West German Karl May films that were wildly popular in the sixties.

I have seen some of those laying at Media Markt. Had no clue they were German. I am getting curious to pick them up.

edit:
WTF? Just found out that Klaus Kinski and Terence Hill are playing in one film as well. :D
 
Forostar said:
Sounds very good. Do you have a title or two?

It's been ages since I saw any of them, so I'll have to direct you to this list: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEFA-Indianerfilm

WTF? Just found out that Klaus Kinski and Terence Hill are playing in one film as well. :D

Yeah, Kinski's performance is quite memorable (as always), while I think Terence Hill was more a blink and miss occurance (I also think he used his original Italian name back then). But to be honest, I saw all those films when I was a child, and seeing how they all used the same actors, characters, production design and sets, all those films blend together in my memory. Which means that basically, if you've seen one, you've seen all. Even the difference between those set in the Wild West and those in the Middle East isn't as big as you'd think.

I'd say the value of these films is more historical than artistic. Back in the mid-sixties, they were the biggest item in German popular culture, and all succeeding generations (like me) grew up with them as Saturday morning viewing. I guess that is fading by now, but I'm pretty sure that if you ask any (former west) German of my age and older, he'd instantly recognise any picture or piece of the score from those films, and name the leading actors and characters. As if to prove that, one of the most successful German films of all times is a parodyof that series in general, although I personally think it is a prime example of everything that is wrong with German humour.
 
Perun, bearfan, thanks for the info, and links to the lists, I'll check them later.


Perun said:
I'd say the value of these films is more historical than artistic.

I have read some Karl May books with big pleasure so my interest is also generated by some nostalgia I guess. :)

Perun said:
...  As if to prove that, one of the most successful German films of all times is a parodyof that series in general, although I personally think it is a prime example of everything that is wrong with German humour.

That photo! *makes sign of the cross* Heresy!  :D
 
Watched 49th Parallel (1941), the story of a German U-Boat crew trapped in Eastern Canada and their attempt to rally a band on Germans that live near Winnepeg.  Lawrence Olivier stars in it.  Real good movie, the Nazi were a bit sterotypical as they were in most war time movies, but it was an interesting story.
 
Interesting, bearfan. I have this one here as well. Looking forward to see it sometime. In the last seven days I've seen these films:

Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia (1974)
director: Sam Peckinpah

Follow a man who wants a million but first he has to experience (and cause) lots of violence. As always: great portrayal of action (read: violence) by Peckinpah, best known for his innovative use of slow-motion.


The Secret Fury (1950)
director: Mel Ferrer

What starts off as a screwball comedy (and Claudette Colbert's presence reinforces this impression) later evolves as a thrilling noir. Atmospheric cinematography especially in the second half of the film when Robert Ryan tries to find the truth…


Mystery Street (1950)
director: John Sturges

Be the witness of a murder and the following investigation, step by step. With help of Harvard University a lieutenant tries to solve the case. Filmed by master of shadow and light, John Alton, whose artistic touch makes this picture even more thrilling.


The Crooked Way (1949)
director: Robert Florey

One doesn’t need “The Big Sleep” or “Out of the Past” to show an example of a quintessential film noir. However big classics these two (or others) may be, “The Crooked Way” also has all the typical noir elements. The anti-hero, the atmospheric photography, the suspense, it’s all here.

All in all: A breathtaking one hour and a half, thanks to the doomy plot and masterful cinematography with fantastic compositions and angles (again by John Alton).
 
Good summary of Mystery Street, the camera man deserved an award for that movie.  I would call it a mini groundbreaking movie from a technical aspect.

Crooked Way has been on my "to watch" list for a long time, will have to get around to that.
 
bearfan said:
the camera man deserved an award for that movie.

John Alton, so renowned for his black and white photography, did win one Oscar (co-shared with someone else) for a colour movie. :/

Mystery Street never got an award, but it was nominated for Best Writing, Motion Picture Story.
 
Watched 2 older WWII movies

The One That Got Away (1957), a recounting of German POW von Werra and his escapes from English POW camps.  Based on a true story, it made for a good movie.  A bit of an odd twist in WWII films (at least to that point) where the German is the protagonist.  Hardy Kruger played the lead, he was quite good,

Next, The Gallant Hours (1960) starring James Cagney as Admiral Halsey and Guadalcanal.  A bit of an odd movie, it is a biotopic and is partially narrated.  Overall a good movie, but the music was not very good and the narration was out of place in parts.
 
I saw "Citizen Kane" the other day. Best movie of all time? Probably not. But I do see the innovation in it, looking at it from a  "1941" perspective. The revelation of the meaning of "Rosebud" at the end of the movie was very anti-climatic if you ask me. Perhaps intended?
 
citizen Kane was a direct rebuke to William Randolph Hearst.  There is a recent movie called RKO 281 The Battle Over Citizen Kane which is pretty accurate and really interesting.  Also, The Cat's Meow  is a good movie about Hearst and how he (allegedly) got away with murder.
 
Cry Danger (1951)
director: Robert Parrish

Not a very good film, and the only exciting scenes were at the end. Annoying dialogues, all characters were not likable and the main actor (Dick Powell) was almost a parody of an anti-hero.



Road House (1948)
director: Jean Negulesco

Eddie Muller (noir writer) calls it the best Fox film noir from the 1940s. Not sure if I agree but it surely comes close. The increasing tension between the characters is crucial and leads to thrilling end sequences. Great roles from Ida Lupino and Richard Widmark (in his 3rd film).
 
When Strangers Marry (1944)
director: William Castle

According to Orson Welles,... “When Strangers Marry” “isn't as slick as ‘Double Indemnity' or as glossy as ‘Laura’, but it's better acted and better directed ... than either.” No matter if one agrees with this statement, this film is surely very well-made and the principal actors do indeed a very good job. The script may not be as clever as in “Indemnity” or “Laura”, but there is a lot that makes up for that. The shadowy photography and the dark atmosphere bring to mind Val Lewton classics. Kim Hunter’s presence (whose first role was in Lewton’s “Seventh Victim”) adds to that impression. Trivia: Robert Mitchum in his first film noir.


The Sleeping City (1950)
director: George Sherman

A hospital noir, where the murder case can only be solved by an infiltration! Actually, we already know from the very beginning that it is going to be an interesting film. Shot in a semi-documentary style in New York, this feature has lots of authenticity.

Richard%20Conte%20in%20TheSleepingCity.jpg


The plot is really engaging. And thanks to the original story, good performances and this authentic feel, this movie will not be easily forgotten or confused with another noir.
 
Above Suspicion (1943)
director: Richard Thorpe

Basil Rathbone, Conradt Veidt and Joan Crawford together in one war thriller sounds quite promising. However, the first half of the film unfortunately recalled “The Thin Man” cycle. The same kind of slightly annoying humour, though husband and wife are playing spies instead of detectives. But luckily things get more interesting when Rathbone comes into action. The film takes a darker, more thrilling turn and the jokes (mostly courtesy of Herr Veidt – in his last role ever) become more sophisticated and political. Quite an entertaining film, though this might be a slight disappointment when one is expecting a really tense, adventurous spy war thriller.


@Bearfan, I just read what you're reading and later I thought of these two posts:

bearfan said:
3. Do you have favorite directors?
..., Ford, ...

+

bearfan said:
I have a general interest in East Germany/Eastern Europe post WWII.

I am not sure what in films and books on Eastern Europe attracts you (maybe the dark past?) but it looks like you have interest in "real" history of places and people in a dark past.

Perhaps you have the same interest but then looking at the USA. Since you are a film buff this might be cool to check:

Have seen the Canadian documentary Reel Injun which is a portrayal of Native Americans in film?

I ask this especially because you mention Ford as one of your favourite directors. If there was ever one filmmaker on this planet who depicted Indians in a wrong way (and in a racist manner) it was John Ford.

I'd say if you're into Westerns, have interest in (the treatment of) native Americans or just wish to explore a dark side of Hollywood, and its huge impact on society, go and check it, if you haven't yet. It's a confronting film but with humour as well.

From wiki:
The film was inspired, in part, by (director) Diamond's own experiences as a child in Waskaganish, Quebec, where he and other Native children would play cowboys and Indians after local screenings of Westerns in their remote community. Diamond remembers that although the children were in fact "Indians," they all wanted to be the cowboys. Afterwards, when he was old enough to move south to study, he would be questioned by non-Native people about whether his people lived in teepees and rode horses, causing Diamond to realize that their preconceptions about Native people were also derived from movies.
 
I studied history in college, mainly Central Europe.  Not sure why, but the territory that was basically the Central Powers in WWI has always held an interest.  I have had the chance to visit the area a few times as well and really enjoyed it.  The East block films certainly are a counter point to those coming out of the West at the time, it is interesting to compare and contrast.

I am not really into Westerns, the Ford films I enjoy the most are his World War II era films.  But, in the case of films that treat Indians, Blacks, Jews, etc in what today would be considered a negative light, I try to put myself into the time the film was made.  I have a bit of a problem with the current treatment of D.W. Griffith for example.  Certainly Birth of a Nation is not a film anyone would make now and looking at it now (perhaps even then) it was racist, but there is an effort to remove him from film history when he was one of the most revolutionary film makers of early cinema. 
 
Well, I am not trying to remove Ford from film history for sure.  :)

His (and other's) wrong depicting of native Americans had a terrible effect: large scale discrimination.
I was pretty sure you'd be interested in this well made documentary, which isn't just about Ford of course.

When you talk about East block films you also might want to check out films by Wajda (Polish director).
 
I say Katyn (Wajda) a year or so ago, an excellent film. 

As far as Ford, no one would have thought about removing Griffith from history 20 years ago, but now buildings and awards have been renamed, etc. 
 
bearfan said:
I say Katyn (Wajda) a year or so ago, an excellent film.

Saw that too, in a cinema in Krakow. Very impressive indeed. The (old!) man made many more good films, since the fifties.
I still need to see quite a lot of them.
 
Back
Top