Citizen Rules...Cinemaesque Chat-n-Review

Director: Victor Fleming
Writer: Dalton Trumbo (screenplay)
Cast: Spencer Tracy, Irene Dunne, Van Johnson
Genre: Fantasy Drama, Romance, War

Steven Spielberg, you know the famous director, this old movie is one of his favorites. He liked A Guy Name Joe so much that he remade it in 1989 as Always. Spielberg's love of this movie ever since he was a child, tell us something about the director and the kind of stories that captive him... This old film has charm, it has hope, it has adventure and it has heroic elements all combined with a good dose of fantasy. Hey if Spielberg likes this, you know it has to have some magic feel good moments.


Any serious film buff should, watch Always (1989) then watch this one and see how Spielberg the director, seen story elements in the original film that he would then keep and incorporate into his own remake. Both film are similar and yet quite different too.

I liked this old movie...and what's not to like about it with it's highly personable cast including: Spencer Tracy playing Pete the reckless WWII pilot who ends up a ghost and his love, Dorinda played by charming Irene Dunn. After Pete manages to get himself killed sinking an enemy ship he then ends up in a flyers heaven, where his commander officer is a WWI pilot played by Lionel Barrymore. Pete is then sent back to earth to be a guardian angel to a new recruit who's just learning to fly military planes, Ted played by Van Johnson. And lets not forget the always likeable character actor, Ward Bond.


I found the romance between Pete and Dorinda convincing and even more convincing was the romance between Ted and Dorinda... and that's despite the fact that Irene Dunn was 18 years older than Van Johnson.

Honorable mention to... the P38 Lighting, we get to see some actual footage of this famous U.S. plane in action, yahoo!

Attachments

     

Great review theread Citizen! TONGO humbled.

Thanks Tongo!...One of these days I'm going to make an index of all my movie review titles with clickable links. I can't even remember sometimes what I've reviewed

Loved your review of this movie, Citizen...I wish I had watched it before I did my Bill Murray list...definitely adding it to my watchlist.

Thanks Gideon, it's a neat little movie, unpretentious but spirited...(damn that sounds like something one would say about wine.) I liked Bill Murray in it, it's worth the time to watch it.

Great review of A Guy Named Joe. I think you enjoyed this movie more than the remake because the wartime setting in this movie works for you, but I prefer the updated version where Pete is still a hotshot pilot, but it's not wartime. I also prefer Richard Dreyfuss as Pete over Spencer Tracy because I felt that Dreyfuss played the role more as being hurt by the new romance, but Tracy seemed more jealous of it.

I agree that the romance between Ted and Dorinda was much more convincing in this movie than in the remake. It's interesting to note that Van Johnson's role was almost recast after he was seriously injured in an auto accident, but both Spencer Tracy and Irene Dunne insisted that production was stopped until he was able to return to finish filming.

__________________
.
If I answer a game thread correctly, just skip my turn and continue with the game.
OPEN FLOOR.

Enjoyed your review of this movie and after recently watching Burnt, I may have to add this to my watchlist...couldn't be any worse.

I haven't seen Burnt (2015) but I read your review. I thought about the movie as I like films about the culinary arts. I think you would like Chef (2014) better. Even better yet is a film HoneyKid recommended to me, link to my review:
The Hundred Foot Journey (2014)

Director: Sam Wood
Cast: Clark Gable, Van Johnson, Walter Pidgeon, Brian Donlevy, Charles Bickford, John Hodiak, Edward Arnold
Genre: War Drama

Synopsis (spoiler free): During World War II, a U.S. General (Clark Gable) is placed in charge of the 5th Bomber Division, air command center in England. The general must send the B-17 bombers deep into Germany to destroy the Nazi's new super weapon, the Messerschmitt, jet powered planes. The jet factories are deep in Germany where the bombers have to travel without the aid of U.S. fighter escort planes. This makes for a deadly mission for the Yanks. If they don't succeed, Germany will have the upper hand in air supremacy and could win the war. Along the way the general has to fight with U.S. congressmen and his own chain of command, over the political cost of losing so many American lives on the mission. To make matters worse the weather is only clear for high altitude aerial bombing for a few days over the targets.


My thoughts: Command Decision was adapted from a stage play, which in turn was based on a successful novel by the same name. Most of the movie's scenes are set inside the command center and adjacent rooms. The film introduces a number of military type characters and is rich in dialogue, as one would expect from a play based movie. What makes this a unique war film is it explores the military and political challenges of an air commander and those around him.

Not about action: there's no real war action scenes in this, it's more cerebral...and refreshingly so. That's not to say, it's not exciting, it's exciting. The conflict comes from the various opponents of the current bombing strategy as they try to outmaneuver each other.

Also interesting: is the all star, all male cast. There's not a woman to be seen, not even a sweetheart or a secretary. And what a cast this has! In one scene we get all the primary actors together in one large room, each giving their spew as to how the bombers should be used. It's an interesting contrast seeing Clark Gable up against Walter Pidgeon and Charles Bickford. With Van Johnson, John Hodiak and Brian Donlevey in the wings. I thought Clark Gable and Van Johnson were the stand outs in this, they both seemed very natural in their roles.

Pair Command Decision with Twelve O'Clock High (1949) and you'll have one helluva blast.

+

Attachments

   

Director: Steven Spielberg
Cast: Tom Hanks, Mark Rylance
Genre: Drama, History

Synopsis (spoiler free): In 1960 during the height of the Cold War, an American lawyer (Tom Hanks) reluctantly agrees to defend an accused Soviet spy who has been captured (Mark Rylance). After the Soviet Union shoots down an American U2 spy plane, the CIA taps the lawyer to negotiate an exchange for the Soviet spy for the American spy plane pilot, Francis Gary Powers.

Review: What can I say, Spielberg is a genius, no wonder Bridge of Spies was nominated for best picture. Based on true events, this felt like I was there, witnessing these events as they took place in U.S. court rooms, and in integration cells and on the streets of East Germany. I was engrossed in this, it held my attention fast....and there's no real action scenes to speak of, the 'action' comes from the dialogue and the characters...and that worked beautifully.

Spielberg knows how to put the viewer in the time frame, every detail in the sets is circa 1960. I believed it was 1960. Even those set pieces that are way out of frame have still been carefully selected and placed to give authenticity.


Tom Hanks, I was confident before even seeing this that if Tom Hanks was in it, he would be good. He was excellent. He never breaks character, he never goes over the top. And he always seem genuine. He made the film. I also enjoyed the performance by the Soviet spy played by Mark Rylance.


What a nice offering from Mr Spielberg, keep em coming. I enjoyed it!

Attachments

 

I had to really look at my favourite films and rewatch some parts of them to actually realise why I love film so much. Film has become a major and important part of my life - yet it's hard for me to word why I love it so much. But after some contemplation I can do my best to give you my reason for my love of cinema.

I realised that almost every single film which is on my favourites list speaks out to me in a profound manner, it carries a message to me which effects me enough to be left shaken by what I saw and to start contemplating the films message. The film "Treasures of the Sierra Madre" made me promise to myself that I would never let money corrupt me, the Film "Interstellar" made me start taking interest in science and making an effort to learn science, "Social Network" made me actually start reading about computing history and posed some big questions for me to ask on the history of a lot of computer geniuses. The film "Goodfellas" inspired me to want to become a movie director and the film "La Dolce Vita" is still stuck in my mind. It has slowly been changing the way I think and react to select situations as I only saw it recently I cannot describe my love for it just yet.

Then there are films which don't have an extremely profound message to tell me - but they trap me into there world and make me fall in love with there characters. They make me idolise and remember the heroes and heroines of the film and whilst the film doesn't communicate some important message, it effects me in a way that I make the message myself. I will forever love Indiana Jones and his adventures, does he have a profound effect one me? Yes and No. Indiana Jones traps me into a world of crazy adventures which I would never dare to do - that inspires me to do stuff I normally wouldn't do, to step out of my boundaries and look at life in a more cynical but careful way. Films like "Notorious" trap me into there feel-good romance story which brings a big smile on my face everytime. It makes me think about how love works in itself and the film itself makes me fall in love with it.

What is the common factor in all of this? This films impact me in some way or another, not only did they entertain me, but they spoke to me or my emotions or both. They slowly and unknowingly changed who I am as a person and how I think. They stuck with me due to how poetic they are, how they play out and how the effect me. I love film as film speaks to me in a way nothing or nobody else can - its because film not only entertains me but emotionally or mentally changes me.

Excellent post Khuzy!
Yes I can see that as a message in the film. I can also see that film saying: one should never get themselves in a situation where their life is in trusted to strangers, as ultimately people can be self serving. Treasure of the Sierra Madre is one of my all time favorite films.

Sean Penn has made a name for himself in such films as: Fast Times at Ridgemont High (1982), Casualties of War (1989) and Milk (2008)...to name just a few of his fine films. Usually if Sean Penn is in the movie, it's worth watching.

I had seen Dead Man Walking years ago but had forgotten just how amazing of a performance Sean Penn gives! He totally immerses himself in the character, his accent, his body language, his demeanor, even his eye movements are so in tune with the type of character he plays. IMO Sean Penn is the best actor working today...Heck I would even rank him as one of the all time greats!


Susan Sarandon is pretty darn good too, and she needs to be as she is our eyes and ears into the world of a prison's death row. If her character was played in other way this film might not have worked as good as it did. It works brilliantly...

Director Tim Robbins, keeps the films subject matter of a convicted murder who claims he's innocent balanced, and I respect that. Sean Penn's character is not likable in fact he's creepy, but yet by the end of the film Robbins manages to make that character a human being and not just a monster.

I expected this to be an anti death penalty film. But no, this film is unflinching in showing the brutality of the crime and the destruction of the lives of the victims families as well as the hardships a prisoner on death row goes through. This is one intelligent film, that doesn't take sides, but shows it as it is and lets you decide how you feel about the death penalty. Powerful stuff.

Even though I am very careful not to spoil the movie in my reviews. The next review I do talk about what happens in the ending.

Director: Spike Jonze
Writers: Susan Orlean(novel), Charlie Kaufman(screenplay)
Cast: Nicolas Cage, Meryl Streep, Chris Cooper
Genre: Comedy Drama

A brilliant but hopelessly nervous-shy screenwriter (Nicholas Cage) becomes desperate as he tries and fails to adapt the novel, "The Orchid Thief" by Susan Orlean for the movies. Meanwhile his happy go lucky twin also played by Nicholas Cage, has successes with his screenplay.


I had seen this a few years before but I remembered nothing of the film. Which is not a good sign! Not one scene, not one character, not even the big finally rang a bell. How could a movie be erased out of my memory? With not even a vague inkling of having ever seen it. Perhaps the plot of Being John Malkovich is more plausible than commonly believed. I sometimes think about that movie, so it's strange that Adaption starts off on the set of Being John Malkovich.

So....I'm watching the film for the second time, which is actually the first time, and despite the fact that I supposedly hated the film 10 years ago, I'm loving it now. I find the film uniquely different, the duel stories of the Orchid Hunter and the story line of the self doubting screen writer is fascinating. Nicholas Cage is really good in this, and I wonder why he made so many crap movies when he's such a talented actor. The toothless orchid guy is pretty far out too and even more so is he's back story, I like it! The film is written very intelligently and I'm thinking this is a work of art.

But then a funny, but not humorous, thing happens: The film talks about what not to do in a screen play, Cage's character says he wants to do a screen adaptation that does not have car chases and guns and typically Hollywood crap.

The ending..... And that's exactly what we get in the end! This brilliant film is trounced on by Spike Jonz in the third act. We were just warned that a film could have flaws but the audience well forgive that, if the ending wows them. Then we get this really stupid, cliche Hollywood ending, with car chases, and guns and alligators! I just about ripped up all the Orchids in the house and flush them down the toilet in protest...or should I have applauded?

Why are some people having trouble understanding that is the point of the third act of Adaptation. That's rhetorical, it's baffling. Wish you had liked it more CR. I think it is Kauffman's funniest. I love Chris Cooper in this film.

__________________
Letterboxd

“Except for markf, you’re all a disgrace to cinema.”

I did get the third act and I knew it was intentional irony by Spike Jonz to give us the exact ending that Charlie had told his twin brother Donald not to do in a screenplay (car chases, gun play, etc). I wrote about that in more detail in the 9th Hof. This is what I said there:

Ok then I guess I will give Bridge of Spies a shot.

Yeah, you should Cricket, I think you would at least like it, maybe even really like it. I never got bored and I was engaged and into the story. I have Spot Light coming sometime in the near future.

Just put it atop the queue for next weekend. That'll be the one movie I pick out every weekend to watch with wifey.