Discussion:
Last Movie Watched
(too old to reply)
Marv Soloff
2008-04-30 14:06:15 UTC
Permalink
"The Deserter" (aka "Ride to Glory" and "The Devil's Backbone") (Italy -
1971)

Westerns are not my thing. Spaghetti westerns are really not my thing.
Aside from the high
level of butchery on screen, this effort, written by Clair Huffaker and
directed by Burt Kennedy,
has a really great cast list; Ian Bannen, Richard Crenna, Chuck Connors,
Ricardo Montalban, Woody
Strode, a very bored John Huston and featuring someone named Bekim
Fehmiu (whoever he was). The cast is mostly wasted, the story infantile:
An Army captain blames the Army for the death of his family and deserts.
Later he hooks back in for vengeance. A wasted two hours.

Marv
George Peatty
2008-04-30 14:28:30 UTC
Permalink
Road to Perdition - ordinary gangster flick with extraordinary performances
by Paul Newman and Tom Hanks. Newman has the best line in the movie: "There
are only murderers in this room." SPOILER ALERT: I have a problem with the
movie's climax. I don't understand why Maguire did the hit, and who ordered
it. Both Rooneys were dead at that point. The mob should have been
satisfied. Was it to send a message about messing with mob money?

The Day After Tomorrow - Preachy disaster flick with awesome special
effects. The problem with disaster flicks, I am convinced, is they try to
build pathos by involving us in lives of people we don't care about. This
movie did very little of that, and instead focused on the character's
struggle to survive the disaster. Rossum and Gylenhaal looked like they
were born to be a couple. A lot of thought went into showing how a new ice
age might unfold; too bad Emmerich couldn't resist the urge to preach to us
..
David Oberman
2008-04-30 16:14:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Peatty
The Day After Tomorrow - Preachy disaster flick with awesome special
effects. The problem with disaster flicks, I am convinced, is they try to
build pathos by involving us in lives of people we don't care about. This
movie did very little of that, and instead focused on the character's
struggle to survive the disaster. Rossum and Gylenhaal looked like they
were born to be a couple. A lot of thought went into showing how a new ice
age might unfold; too bad Emmerich couldn't resist the urge to preach to us
Did you get the feeling that there was some sort of subtle point being
made or reference being drawn in the book-burning in the library?

Also, the title is just stupid; it falls like a lead weight. (In that
sense I guess it's perfect for the film.)







____

"I want to ask you a bunch of questions, &
I want you to answer them immediately."

-- Arnold Schwarzenegger as
"Kindergarten Cop" to kids
George Peatty
2008-04-30 16:27:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Oberman
Post by George Peatty
The Day After Tomorrow - Preachy disaster flick with awesome special
effects. The problem with disaster flicks, I am convinced, is they try to
build pathos by involving us in lives of people we don't care about. This
movie did very little of that, and instead focused on the character's
struggle to survive the disaster. Rossum and Gylenhaal looked like they
were born to be a couple. A lot of thought went into showing how a new ice
age might unfold; too bad Emmerich couldn't resist the urge to preach to us
Did you get the feeling that there was some sort of subtle point being
made or reference being drawn in the book-burning in the library?
The only point I inferred was straightforward and not at all subtle, that
people will do anything to survive. If there was more than that intended,
it certainly sailed over my head, though that is hardly remarkable .. I tend
to miss a lot ..
Pjk
2008-04-30 17:20:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Peatty
Post by David Oberman
Post by George Peatty
The Day After Tomorrow - Preachy disaster flick with awesome special
effects.  The problem with disaster flicks, I am convinced, is they try to
build pathos by involving us in lives of people we don't care about.  This
movie did very little of that, and instead focused on the character's
struggle to survive the disaster.  Rossum and Gylenhaal looked like they
were born to be a couple.  A lot of thought went into showing how a new ice
age might unfold; too bad Emmerich couldn't resist the urge to preach to us
Did you get the feeling that there was some sort of subtle point being
made or reference being drawn in the book-burning in the library?
The only point I inferred was straightforward and not at all subtle, that
people will do anything to survive.  If there was more than that intended,
it certainly sailed over my head, though that is hardly remarkable .. I tend
to miss a lot ..
A foreign film, Joyeux Noel (Merry Christmas) based on the so-called
Christmas truce between groups of French, Scotts and German troops in
1914. It's very sad because what they did was right and the viewer
knows they are never going to get away with it.

It reminded me of Letters from Iwo Jima which commits the cardinal sin
of humanizing the enemy.

Pjk
Stone me
2008-04-30 18:33:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Peatty
Post by David Oberman
Post by George Peatty
The Day After Tomorrow - Preachy disaster flick with awesome special
effects. The problem with disaster flicks, I am convinced, is they try
to
build pathos by involving us in lives of people we don't care about.
This
movie did very little of that, and instead focused on the character's
struggle to survive the disaster. Rossum and Gylenhaal looked like they
were born to be a couple. A lot of thought went into showing how a new
ice
age might unfold; too bad Emmerich couldn't resist the urge to preach to us
Did you get the feeling that there was some sort of subtle point being
made or reference being drawn in the book-burning in the library?
The only point I inferred was straightforward and not at all subtle, that
people will do anything to survive. If there was more than that intended,
it certainly sailed over my head, though that is hardly remarkable .. I tend
to miss a lot ..
A foreign film, Joyeux Noel (Merry Christmas) based on the so-called
Christmas truce between groups of French, Scotts and German troops in
1914. It's very sad because what they did was right and the viewer
knows they are never going to get away with it.

It reminded me of Letters from Iwo Jima which commits the cardinal sin
of humanizing the enemy.

Pjk

Would you elaborate on that last sentence please?
I haven't seen the mentioned film, so I suppose the plot constuction is
undermined
because it had set out to portray enemies in sharp focus?
Some successful war films do commit your "cardinal sin".
In "Full Metal Jacket" the sniper (Ngoc Le)mercilessly does her job, but
when
she is wounded, dying, and lying at the feet of the remaining platoon, she
begs
to be shot. Eventually one of them with some remaining humanity does the
job.

The difference is the proposal that war is the "evil" rather than some
"gooks".

Stone me.
Jim Beaver
2008-04-30 18:49:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pjk
Post by George Peatty
Post by David Oberman
Post by George Peatty
The Day After Tomorrow - Preachy disaster flick with awesome special
effects. The problem with disaster flicks, I am convinced, is they try
to
build pathos by involving us in lives of people we don't care about.
This
movie did very little of that, and instead focused on the character's
struggle to survive the disaster. Rossum and Gylenhaal looked like they
were born to be a couple. A lot of thought went into showing how a new
ice
age might unfold; too bad Emmerich couldn't resist the urge to preach to us
Did you get the feeling that there was some sort of subtle point being
made or reference being drawn in the book-burning in the library?
The only point I inferred was straightforward and not at all subtle, that
people will do anything to survive. If there was more than that intended,
it certainly sailed over my head, though that is hardly remarkable .. I tend
to miss a lot ..
A foreign film, Joyeux Noel (Merry Christmas) based on the so-called
Christmas truce between groups of French, Scotts and German troops in
1914. It's very sad because what they did was right and the viewer
knows they are never going to get away with it.
It reminded me of Letters from Iwo Jima which commits the cardinal sin
of humanizing the enemy.
Pjk
Would you elaborate on that last sentence please?
Sarcasm, methinks.

Jim Beaver
Pjk
2008-05-01 16:05:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pjk
Post by George Peatty
Post by David Oberman
Post by George Peatty
The Day After Tomorrow - Preachy disaster flick with awesome special
effects. The problem with disaster flicks, I am convinced, is they try
to
build pathos by involving us in lives of people we don't care about.
This
movie did very little of that, and instead focused on the character's
struggle to survive the disaster. Rossum and Gylenhaal looked like they
were born to be a couple. A lot of thought went into showing how a new
ice
age might unfold; too bad Emmerich couldn't resist the urge to preach to us
Did you get the feeling that there was some sort of subtle point being
made or reference being drawn in the book-burning in the library?
The only point I inferred was straightforward and not at all subtle, that
people will do anything to survive. If there was more than that intended,
it certainly sailed over my head, though that is hardly remarkable .. I tend
to miss a lot ..
A foreign film, Joyeux Noel (Merry Christmas) based on the so-called
Christmas truce between groups of French, Scotts and German troops in
1914. It's very sad because what they did was right and the viewer
knows they are never going to get away with it.
It reminded me of Letters from Iwo Jima which commits the cardinal sin
of humanizing the enemy.
Pjk
Would you elaborate on that last sentence please?
I haven't seen the mentioned film, so I suppose the plot constuction is
undermined
because it had set out to portray enemies in sharp focus?
Some successful war films do commit your "cardinal sin".
In "Full Metal Jacket" the sniper (Ngoc Le)mercilessly does her job, but
when
she is wounded, dying, and lying at the feet of the remaining platoon, she
begs
to be shot. Eventually one of them with some remaining humanity does the
job.
The difference is the proposal that war is the "evil" rather than some
"gooks".
Stone me.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Both films treat the traditional enemies, whether German or Japanese,
as soldiers who have wives and children back home whom they love and
miss, and in several cases they were forced to fight rather than
volunteering. The viewer gets to know more about the character then a
cardboard cutout whose only purpose is killing the good guys. We know
nothing more about Ngoc Le than this.

This is opposed to the more usual, American, characterization of the
enemy, as fanatic sub-humans who willingly sacrifice themselves for
the Fatherland or the Emporer without question. How else to convince
18 year olds that one of the Commandments will be held in abeiance for
several years? Begin by not calling them soldiers, but gooks, slopes,
krauts, and that they are more at home in the jungles, like animals.
So killing them is no problem.

Once the combatants are allowed to fraternixe and find out that what
they have been told about the enemy is not true, killing them becomes
a problem. The justification is subverted by the reality of the
situation, and rathe than listen to their superiors simply because
they are in a postion of superiority, the soldiers decide for
themselves what is right.

This happend soldier to soldier in Joyeux Noel, but I think more
importantly, soldier (Japanese) to viewer.

Pjk
Stone me
2008-05-01 19:05:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pjk
Post by George Peatty
Post by David Oberman
Post by George Peatty
The Day After Tomorrow - Preachy disaster flick with awesome special
effects. The problem with disaster flicks, I am convinced, is they try
to
build pathos by involving us in lives of people we don't care about.
This
movie did very little of that, and instead focused on the character's
struggle to survive the disaster. Rossum and Gylenhaal looked like they
were born to be a couple. A lot of thought went into showing how a new
ice
age might unfold; too bad Emmerich couldn't resist the urge to preach
to
us
Did you get the feeling that there was some sort of subtle point being
made or reference being drawn in the book-burning in the library?
The only point I inferred was straightforward and not at all subtle, that
people will do anything to survive. If there was more than that intended,
it certainly sailed over my head, though that is hardly remarkable .. I tend
to miss a lot ..
A foreign film, Joyeux Noel (Merry Christmas) based on the so-called
Christmas truce between groups of French, Scotts and German troops in
1914. It's very sad because what they did was right and the viewer
knows they are never going to get away with it.
It reminded me of Letters from Iwo Jima which commits the cardinal sin
of humanizing the enemy.
Pjk
Would you elaborate on that last sentence please?
I haven't seen the mentioned film, so I suppose the plot constuction is
undermined
because it had set out to portray enemies in sharp focus?
Some successful war films do commit your "cardinal sin".
In "Full Metal Jacket" the sniper (Ngoc Le)mercilessly does her job, but
when
she is wounded, dying, and lying at the feet of the remaining platoon, she
begs
to be shot. Eventually one of them with some remaining humanity does the
job.
The difference is the proposal that war is the "evil" rather than some
"gooks".
Stone me.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Both films treat the traditional enemies, whether German or Japanese,
as soldiers who have wives and children back home whom they love and
miss, and in several cases they were forced to fight rather than
volunteering. The viewer gets to know more about the character then a
cardboard cutout whose only purpose is killing the good guys. We know
nothing more about Ngoc Le than this.

This is opposed to the more usual, American, characterization of the
enemy, as fanatic sub-humans who willingly sacrifice themselves for
the Fatherland or the Emporer without question. How else to convince
18 year olds that one of the Commandments will be held in abeiance for
several years? Begin by not calling them soldiers, but gooks, slopes,
krauts, and that they are more at home in the jungles, like animals.
So killing them is no problem.

Once the combatants are allowed to fraternixe and find out that what
they have been told about the enemy is not true, killing them becomes
a problem. The justification is subverted by the reality of the
situation, and rathe than listen to their superiors simply because
they are in a postion of superiority, the soldiers decide for
themselves what is right.

This happend soldier to soldier in Joyeux Noel, but I think more
importantly, soldier (Japanese) to viewer.

Pjk

Ok thanks, and in the main I agree.

I think that in Full Metal jacket, the context of the film allows a contrast
where
little is shown of the enemy in the same light as the US soldiers. The
snipers final
moments, while brief and thus given little time for much, nevertheless
provides
a stark contrast when compared to how the enemy is portrayed before.
We see a human, vulnerable, suffering, and at the mercy of her enemy.
Only moments before we are presented with the opposite side, a merciless
sniper picking off soldier after soldier. It's the contrast and the
resultant drama
that make such a big effect.
This must come as a shock for the audience, and in particular those who have
most
adopted the propaganda you refer to.

Of course, there is another opportunity, where the brutal activities of both
sides
could be compared. The media has provided examples before, non more stark
than that referred to as "My Lai".
I think that "Born on the 4th of July" or was it "Platoon", or both that
showed
a massacre of the innocents?
That could be compared to the classic Urban Guerilla behaviour of murder and
intimidation of the countryfolk.

Stone me.
Pjk
2008-05-02 16:53:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pjk
Post by Pjk
Post by George Peatty
Post by David Oberman
Post by George Peatty
The Day After Tomorrow - Preachy disaster flick with awesome special
effects. The problem with disaster flicks, I am convinced, is they try
to
build pathos by involving us in lives of people we don't care about.
This
movie did very little of that, and instead focused on the character's
struggle to survive the disaster. Rossum and Gylenhaal looked like they
were born to be a couple. A lot of thought went into showing how a new
ice
age might unfold; too bad Emmerich couldn't resist the urge to preach
to
us
Did you get the feeling that there was some sort of subtle point being
made or reference being drawn in the book-burning in the library?
The only point I inferred was straightforward and not at all subtle, that
people will do anything to survive. If there was more than that intended,
it certainly sailed over my head, though that is hardly remarkable .. I tend
to miss a lot ..
A foreign film, Joyeux Noel (Merry Christmas) based on the so-called
Christmas truce between groups of French, Scotts and German troops in
1914. It's very sad because what they did was right and the viewer
knows they are never going to get away with it.
It reminded me of Letters from Iwo Jima which commits the cardinal sin
of humanizing the enemy.
Pjk
Would you elaborate on that last sentence please?
I haven't seen the mentioned film, so I suppose the plot constuction is
undermined
because it had set out to portray enemies in sharp focus?
Some successful war films do commit your "cardinal sin".
In "Full Metal Jacket" the sniper (Ngoc Le)mercilessly does her job, but
when
she is wounded, dying, and lying at the feet of the remaining platoon, she
begs
to be shot. Eventually one of them with some remaining humanity does the
job.
The difference is the proposal that war is the "evil" rather than some
"gooks".
Stone me.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Both films treat the traditional enemies, whether German or Japanese,
as soldiers who have wives and children back home whom they love and
miss, and in several cases they were forced to fight rather than
volunteering. The viewer gets to know more about the character then a
cardboard cutout whose only purpose is killing the good guys. We know
nothing more about Ngoc Le than this.
This is opposed to the more usual, American, characterization of the
enemy, as fanatic sub-humans who willingly sacrifice themselves for
the Fatherland or the Emporer without question. How else to convince
18 year olds that one of the Commandments will be held in abeiance for
several years?  Begin by not calling them soldiers, but gooks, slopes,
krauts, and that they are more at home in the jungles, like animals.
So killing them is no problem.
Once the combatants are allowed to fraternixe and find out that what
they have been told about the enemy is not true, killing them becomes
a problem. The justification is subverted by the reality of the
situation, and rathe than listen to their superiors simply because
they are in a postion of superiority, the soldiers decide for
themselves what is right.
This happend soldier to soldier in Joyeux Noel, but I think more
importantly, soldier (Japanese) to viewer.
Pjk
Ok thanks, and in the main I agree.
I think that in Full Metal jacket, the context of the film allows a contrast
where
little is shown of the enemy in the same light as the US soldiers. The
snipers final
moments, while brief and thus given little time for much, nevertheless
provides
a stark contrast when compared to how the enemy is portrayed before.
We see a human, vulnerable, suffering, and at the mercy of her enemy.
Only moments before we are presented with the opposite side, a merciless
sniper picking off soldier after soldier. It's the contrast and the
resultant drama
that make such a big effect.
This must come as a shock for the audience, and in particular those who have
most
adopted the propaganda you refer to.
Of course, there is another opportunity, where the brutal activities of both
sides
could be compared. The media has provided examples before, non more stark
than that referred to as "My Lai".
I think that "Born on the 4th of July" or was it "Platoon", or both that
showed
a massacre of the innocents?
That could be compared to the classic Urban Guerilla behaviour of murder and
intimidation of the countryfolk.
Stone me.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
The examples use use are interesting because in the literature of the
effects of war on the arts, see The Soldier In Fiction, Surrealism and
the Spanish Civil War, Picasso's War, Walking Point - the Vietnam War
and Literature, all say the same things about the Great War and
Vietnam: The feeling that there was no cause which justified the
fighting and dying, that the people back home didn't know what was
going on, and that the people in charge, military and political, were
lying about the progress of the war. Sound familiar?

Pjk
Stone me
2008-05-02 18:38:59 UTC
Permalink
Snipped for space
Post by Stone me
Ok thanks, and in the main I agree.
I think that in Full Metal jacket, the context of the film allows a contrast
where
little is shown of the enemy in the same light as the US soldiers. The
snipers final
moments, while brief and thus given little time for much, nevertheless
provides
a stark contrast when compared to how the enemy is portrayed before.
We see a human, vulnerable, suffering, and at the mercy of her enemy.
Only moments before we are presented with the opposite side, a merciless
sniper picking off soldier after soldier. It's the contrast and the
resultant drama
that make such a big effect.
This must come as a shock for the audience, and in particular those who have
most
adopted the propaganda you refer to.
Of course, there is another opportunity, where the brutal activities of both
sides
could be compared. The media has provided examples before, non more stark
than that referred to as "My Lai".
I think that "Born on the 4th of July" or was it "Platoon", or both that
showed
a massacre of the innocents?
That could be compared to the classic Urban Guerilla behaviour of murder and
intimidation of the countryfolk.
Stone me.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
The examples use use are interesting because in the literature of the
effects of war on the arts, see The Soldier In Fiction, Surrealism and
the Spanish Civil War, Picasso's War, Walking Point - the Vietnam War
and Literature, all say the same things about the Great War and
Vietnam: The feeling that there was no cause which justified the
fighting and dying, that the people back home didn't know what was
going on, and that the people in charge, military and political, were
lying about the progress of the war. Sound familiar?

Pjk

What is familiar about USA's stance is that it is a repeat of 100 years ago,
when Britain began a conquest of the Sudan. Another likeness is that of
Imperial Rome's view of the world.

Nothing lasts, but shit keeps happening.

Stone me.
Howard Brazee
2008-05-01 23:09:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pjk
This is opposed to the more usual, American, characterization of the
enemy, as fanatic sub-humans who willingly sacrifice themselves for
the Fatherland or the Emporer without question. How else to convince
18 year olds that one of the Commandments will be held in abeiance for
several years? Begin by not calling them soldiers, but gooks, slopes,
krauts, and that they are more at home in the jungles, like animals.
So killing them is no problem.
Why, specifically "American"?
Post by Pjk
Once the combatants are allowed to fraternixe and find out that what
they have been told about the enemy is not true, killing them becomes
a problem. The justification is subverted by the reality of the
situation, and rathe than listen to their superiors simply because
they are in a postion of superiority, the soldiers decide for
themselves what is right.
This happend soldier to soldier in Joyeux Noel, but I think more
importantly, soldier (Japanese) to viewer.
But the real bad guy here was the Church of England bishop.
Pjk
2008-05-02 16:49:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pjk
This is opposed to the more usual, American, characterization of the
enemy, as fanatic sub-humans who willingly sacrifice themselves for
the Fatherland or the Emporer without question. How else to convince
18 year olds that one of the Commandments will be held in abeiance for
several years?  Begin by not calling them soldiers, but gooks, slopes,
krauts, and that they are more at home in the jungles, like animals.
So killing them is no problem.
Why, specifically "American"?  
Because as far as I can see most of the other major countries have
stopped doing this whereas America is still doing it. We are not
currently fighting a War on Nationalists or a War on Partisans, both
of which convey at least a little bit of justification for their
actions, but a War on Terror / Terrorists. Gooks, Slopes, Krauts,
Terrorists.
Post by Pjk
Once the combatants are allowed to fraternixe and find out that what
they have been told about the enemy is not true, killing them becomes
a problem. The justification is subverted by the reality of the
situation, and rathe than listen to their superiors simply because
they are in a postion of superiority, the soldiers decide for
themselves what is right.
This happend soldier to soldier in Joyeux Noel, but I think more
importantly, soldier (Japanese) to viewer.
But the real bad guy here was the Church of England bishop.
The Bishop was as much a person "...in a positoin of authority" as any
military superior. Worse in terms of the film and in reality since his
authorization, in fact admonition, to kill and that the killing was
justified changed the fight form a war to a crusade, one that was
acceptable in the eyes of God. You might question a human superior's
orders to kill someone but who questions God? Any and every
representative of authority became questionable once the sameness of
the combatants was established.

Pjk
Avoid normal situations.
2008-05-03 03:51:57 UTC
Permalink
[..]
Post by Pjk
The Bishop was as much a person "...in a positoin of authority" as any
military superior. Worse in terms of the film and in reality since his
authorization, in fact admonition, to kill and that the killing was
justified changed the fight form a war to a crusade, one that was
acceptable in the eyes of God. You might question a human superior's
orders to kill someone but who questions God?
*raises hand*

--
alt.flame Special Forces
"The dialogue drones on, but so bee it." -- John Stanley on _The Deadly Bees_
Howard Brazee
2008-05-03 13:42:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pjk
The Bishop was as much a person "...in a positoin of authority" as any
military superior. Worse in terms of the film and in reality since his
authorization, in fact admonition, to kill and that the killing was
justified changed the fight form a war to a crusade, one that was
acceptable in the eyes of God. You might question a human superior's
orders to kill someone but who questions God? Any and every
representative of authority became questionable once the sameness of
the combatants was established.
Lots of countries that had state churches now have populations which
no longer care much about church going. As those states changed
from absolute rule to having elections, people were allowed to
criticize the other party - and associated issues (such as that
party's claim for divine right) also got criticized.
David Oberman
2008-04-30 17:55:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Peatty
Post by David Oberman
Did you get the feeling that there was some sort of subtle point being
made or reference being drawn in the book-burning in the library?
The only point I inferred was straightforward and not at all subtle, that
people will do anything to survive. If there was more than that intended,
it certainly sailed over my head, though that is hardly remarkable
It occurred to me only briefly that there might have been a subtextual
point to it - political or ideological - but I gave it no more thought
than that. I probably figured the movie didn't warrant any extra
thinking!







____

"I want to ask you a bunch of questions, &
I want you to answer them immediately."

-- Arnold Schwarzenegger as
"Kindergarten Cop" to kids
George Peatty
2008-04-30 18:10:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Oberman
Post by George Peatty
The only point I inferred was straightforward and not at all subtle, that
people will do anything to survive. If there was more than that intended,
it certainly sailed over my head, though that is hardly remarkable
It occurred to me only briefly that there might have been a subtextual
point to it - political or ideological - but I gave it no more thought
than that. I probably figured the movie didn't warrant any extra
thinking!
Well, there was that business about the Gutenberg Bible, and the value of
books. The books, and all they represent and contain, became just one more
casualty of the storm. And, their loss was the greatest casualty, though
not the one most keenly felt.
David Oberman
2008-04-30 20:14:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Peatty
Well, there was that business about the Gutenberg Bible, and the value of
books. The books, and all they represent and contain, became just one more
casualty of the storm. And, their loss was the greatest casualty, though
not the one most keenly felt.
Had the director had some genuine wit, he'd have stuck a Jacqueline
Susann or a Leon Uris in among the Henry James & the George Eliot. Or
a Stephen King or Sebastian Junger -- for a double joke!

As it stood, there was no wit or drollery in the entire 2-plus hours
(not even any inadvertent drollery of the type that used to festoon
the Irwin Allen disasters). I found the whole lump dull, dull, dull, &
I think I fell asleep. Also, I vaguely recall vicious, cartoonish
wolves running around, snarling. Does this really happen, or was I
discombobulatedly dreaming of WOLFEN?







____

"I want to ask you a bunch of questions, &
I want you to answer them immediately."

-- Arnold Schwarzenegger as
"Kindergarten Cop" to kids
Frank R.A.J. Maloney
2008-04-30 22:37:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Oberman
Post by George Peatty
Well, there was that business about the Gutenberg Bible, and the value of
books. The books, and all they represent and contain, became just one more
casualty of the storm. And, their loss was the greatest casualty, though
not the one most keenly felt.
Had the director had some genuine wit, he'd have stuck a Jacqueline
Susann or a Leon Uris in among the Henry James & the George Eliot. Or
a Stephen King or Sebastian Junger -- for a double joke!
[deletion]

From _Star Trek IV_:

Kirk: "Oh, the complete works of Jacqueline
Susann, the novels of Harold Robbins....

Spock: "Ah... The giants."
--
Frank in Seattle
____

Frank Richard Aloysius Jude Maloney
"Millennium hand and shrimp."
George Peatty
2008-04-30 23:23:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Oberman
I think I fell asleep. Also, I vaguely recall vicious, cartoonish
wolves running around, snarling. Does this really happen, or was I
discombobulatedly dreaming of WOLFEN?
The wolves had escaped from the zoo. I think they were right at home in the
cold weather for awhile, until that 150 below zero inversion hit. Then it
was lights out for everyone not inside. I liked the movie. It wasn't
great, or terribly moving, but it engaged me for two hours and piqued my
curiosity about what was coming next, so time well spent. I thought it was
a disaster movie done right ..
David Oberman
2008-05-01 00:07:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Peatty
I liked the movie.
George, I just hope you didn't mistake the storm surge (caused by
atmospheric conditions) in the film for a tsunami (shallow-water waves
usually generated seismically).







____

"I want to ask you a bunch of questions, &
I want you to answer them immediately."

-- Arnold Schwarzenegger as
"Kindergarten Cop" to kids
l***@my-deja.com
2008-04-30 15:03:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marv Soloff
"The Deserter" (aka "Ride to Glory" and "The Devil's Backbone") (Italy -
1971)
Westerns are not my thing.  Spaghetti westerns are really not my thing.
  Aside from the high
level of butchery on screen, this effort, written by Clair Huffaker and
directed by Burt Kennedy,
has a really great cast list; Ian Bannen, Richard Crenna, Chuck Connors,
Ricardo Montalban, Woody
Strode, a very bored John Huston and featuring someone named Bekim
  An Army captain blames the Army for the death of his family and deserts.
Later he hooks back in for vengeance.  A wasted two hours.
Marv
It's not an Italian western, it's a western made in Spain by Americans
seeking to duplicate the success of Italian westerns. There was a lot
of that sort of thing going around in that period. Both Huffaker and
Kennedy had a long history with westerns and were actually associated
with many good ones. This wasn't one of their finest moments. Look up
their filmographies on IMDB. Italian westerns were directed by
Italians (Sergio Leone, Sergio Corbucci, Sergio Sollima, Enzo G.
Castellari, Ferdinando Baldi, Duccio Tessari, etc., and the
occasional anglicized name like "Frank Kramer.")

As for Bekim Fehmiu, he was an Egyptian actor who'd starred in the
Paramount hit, THE ADVENTURERS (1970) based on a Harold Robbins novel
about a Porfirio Rubirosa-type Latin lover. Fehmiu faded from view
after THE DESERTER, like so many international would-be stars of the
era.
Joe Gillis
2008-05-01 03:54:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@my-deja.com
As for Bekim Fehmiu, he was an Egyptian actor
Yugoslavian

who'd starred in the
Post by l***@my-deja.com
Paramount hit, THE ADVENTURERS (1970) based on a Harold Robbins novel
about a Porfirio Rubirosa-type Latin lover. Fehmiu faded from view
after THE DESERTER, like so many international would-be stars of the
era.
f***@gmail.com
2020-04-27 18:57:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe Gillis
Post by l***@my-deja.com
As for Bekim Fehmiu, he was an Egyptian actor
Yugoslavian
who'd starred in the
Post by l***@my-deja.com
Paramount hit, THE ADVENTURERS (1970) based on a Harold Robbins novel
about a Porfirio Rubirosa-type Latin lover. Fehmiu faded from view
after THE DESERTER, like so many international would-be stars of the
era.
Bekim Fehmiu was an albanian
f***@gmail.com
2020-04-27 18:58:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe Gillis
Post by l***@my-deja.com
As for Bekim Fehmiu, he was an Egyptian actor
Yugoslavian
who'd starred in the
Post by l***@my-deja.com
Paramount hit, THE ADVENTURERS (1970) based on a Harold Robbins novel
about a Porfirio Rubirosa-type Latin lover. Fehmiu faded from view
after THE DESERTER, like so many international would-be stars of the
era.
Bekim Fehmiu was Albanian

Opry phantom
2008-04-30 17:17:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marv Soloff
"The Deserter" (aka "Ride to Glory" and "The Devil's Backbone") (Italy -
1971)
Westerns are not my thing.  Spaghetti westerns are really not my thing.
  Aside from the high
level of butchery on screen, this effort, written by Clair Huffaker and
directed by Burt Kennedy,
has a really great cast list; Ian Bannen, Richard Crenna, Chuck Connors,
Ricardo Montalban, Woody
Strode, a very bored John Huston and featuring someone named Bekim
  An Army captain blames the Army for the death of his family and deserts.
Later he hooks back in for vengeance.  A wasted two hours.
Why did you "waste" two hours on a genre that's "really not my
thing"?
Marv Soloff
2008-04-30 17:48:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Opry phantom
Post by Marv Soloff
"The Deserter" (aka "Ride to Glory" and "The Devil's Backbone") (Italy -
1971)
Westerns are not my thing. Spaghetti westerns are really not my thing.
Aside from the high
level of butchery on screen, this effort, written by Clair Huffaker and
directed by Burt Kennedy,
has a really great cast list; Ian Bannen, Richard Crenna, Chuck Connors,
Ricardo Montalban, Woody
Strode, a very bored John Huston and featuring someone named Bekim
An Army captain blames the Army for the death of his family and deserts.
Later he hooks back in for vengeance. A wasted two hours.
Why did you "waste" two hours on a genre that's "really not my
thing"?
Wasn't really wasted. Was copying a batch of stuff on the other two
machines. I guess the primary
reason for buying a copy of "The Deserter" was for John Huston's
underwhelming performance.

Marv
Richard Brooks
2008-04-30 18:10:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Opry phantom
Post by Marv Soloff
"The Deserter" (aka "Ride to Glory" and "The Devil's Backbone") (Italy -
1971)
Westerns are not my thing. Spaghetti westerns are really not my thing.
Aside from the high
level of butchery on screen, this effort, written by Clair Huffaker and
directed by Burt Kennedy,
has a really great cast list; Ian Bannen, Richard Crenna, Chuck Connors,
Ricardo Montalban, Woody
Strode, a very bored John Huston and featuring someone named Bekim
An Army captain blames the Army for the death of his family and deserts.
Later he hooks back in for vengeance. A wasted two hours.
Why did you "waste" two hours on a genre that's "really not my
thing"?
Surely the object is to go back to something to see if the genre has
developed or ones mind has changed?
Joe Gillis
2008-05-01 03:52:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marv Soloff
"The Deserter" (aka "Ride to Glory" and "The Devil's Backbone") (Italy -
1971)
Westerns are not my thing. Spaghetti westerns are really not my thing.
Aside from the high
level of butchery on screen, this effort, written by Clair Huffaker and
directed by Burt Kennedy,
has a really great cast list; Ian Bannen, Richard Crenna, Chuck Connors,
Ricardo Montalban, Woody
Strode, a very bored John Huston and featuring someone named Bekim
An Army captain blames the Army for the death of his family and deserts.
Later he hooks back in for vengeance. A wasted two hours.
Marv
Has a g eat cast, was written by Clair Huffaker and directed by Burt
Kennedy, the WAR WAGON team, and it has quite a bit of black humor.
Unfortunately, the star is Bekim Fehmiu , who combines an inexpressive
face with great difficulty speaking English. With another lead, it
might have been a classic.
TBerk
2008-05-01 04:07:15 UTC
Permalink
- Wizards, just because I got a new copy on DVD.

Tonight, If I can stay awake long enough, I'm stuck choosing something
to watch (from a limited supply on hand at the moment) between stuff
that is visually or verbally interesting vs special effects stuff (but
I don't have the surround system reconnected yet).

<sigh>

There are worse problems, I know.


TBerk
El Klauso
2008-05-01 05:19:44 UTC
Permalink
Finally caught up with "The Hours," and was pleased by the Philip
Glass score, which - unlike many of those who have commented upon it -
I did not feel was "too loud." (By this I take it to mean that other
commentators felt it was somehow too intrusive - But I thought it
helped to unite the crazy quilt structure of the piece...)
David Oberman
2008-05-01 15:26:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by TBerk
Tonight, If I can stay awake long enough, I'm stuck choosing something
to watch (from a limited supply on hand at the moment) between stuff
that is visually or verbally interesting vs special effects stuff (but
I don't have the surround system reconnected yet).
I watched IN OLD ARIZONA (1928) with Warner Baxter, co-directed (?) by
Raoul Walsh. This was the first version of the Cisco Kid story I've
seen. I never thought I'd say this -- about anything -- but the story
is dated (pleasant & humorous though it may intermittently be). The
film is certainly dated: it's stagy & the performances (such as they
are) are paced to silent film styles -- weirdly long pauses,
grotesquely large gestures & inflections. The "grammar" of movement &
vocal delivery in sound film was so new that it hadn't been mastered
yet; isolated noises -- of cows, of bells, of boots on dirt -- come
out of nowhere. Sometimes scenes are half over before you're
interested enough to register what they are (as when Cisco rides
through the camp of Mexican families & tosses them some coins). In
this version, Cisco Kid is a Robin Hood type of bandit. He gets
romantically shafted at the end, & his plan is of the "This'll hurt me
more than it hurts you" variety. His last line is the amusing zinger
-- it must be in the O. Henry story.

According to IMDb, some of the footage with Raoul Walsh in the lead
was left in the final film.







____

"I want to ask you a bunch of questions, &
I want you to answer them immediately."

-- Arnold Schwarzenegger as
"Kindergarten Cop" to kids
Anim8rFSK
2008-05-04 18:16:19 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by TBerk
- Wizards, just because I got a new copy on DVD.
I sort of liked Wizards, the one time I saw it, first run in the
theater, although I recall being annoyed that the end was ripped off
wholesale from Larry Niven's "What Good is a Glass Dagger?"
Post by TBerk
Tonight, If I can stay awake long enough, I'm stuck choosing something
to watch (from a limited supply on hand at the moment) between stuff
that is visually or verbally interesting vs special effects stuff (but
I don't have the surround system reconnected yet).
<sigh>
There are worse problems, I know.
TBerk
--
Star Trek 09:

No Shat, No Show.
Loading...