The 27th General Hall of Fame

Tools    






Baby Face (1933)

That's not the screenshot I wanted and it's not the 'look' that I was looking for. I wanted an image of Lily (Barbara Stanwyck) while she's turning on the charm & sex appeal as she moves up the business world.

I was rooting for Lily all the way! I loved every minute of this pre-code classic and I loved seeing a young fresh faced Barbara Stanwyck. This is the role that made her one of the truly great Hollywood stars. Later she would ply her feminine wiles again with that 'look' in Double Indemnity. It's a pity though that many will only know Stanwyck from her later, harder roles when by all accounts she was one of the sweetest, kindest persons on the movie set. Her friends called her 'Missy' during her early film days and described her as a big happy going kid that got along with everyone. Strange then that she often ended up playing cold as ice women. But at least here in Baby Face you can get a glimpse under her veneer and see a real kindness behind her eyes. Which all has nothing to do directly with this film!

My third watch and I still love it.
Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	ojFHl8ieWZDMtkM12SX43bAehy9.jpg
Views:	228
Size:	103.6 KB
ID:	84878  



I wasn't sure how much everyone would enjoy it, but I'm glad it's getting some positive reactions so far.
It's a technically solid and interesting film with some neat stylistic choices and good performances at the center.

You have to figure that most viewers are going to click with at least some of those things.



It's a technically solid and interesting film with some neat stylistic choices and good performances at the center.

You have to figure that most viewers are going to click with at least some of those things.
Yeah, I know. I just wasn't sure if the reactions to it were going to be mixed, slightly positive, or very positive.





Apocalypse Now (1979)
Directed By: Francis Ford Coppola
Starring: Martin Sheen, Robert Duvall, Marlon Brando

What is there to say about Apocalypse Now that hasn't already been covered in-depth thousands of times since the film's initial release? Its depiction of war is well-known, even to people who haven't ever seen it. I could easily write at length about the pointless deaths, the destruction caused solely for soldiers' pleasure, or the increasing disillusionment with how the military is being run, but I don't think any of that is necessary.

Instead I want to bring up some comments my room mate made as he passed by, and took notice of what I was watching. He's never seen Apocalypse Now before, and only knows a few lines and images of the film that have become part of pop culture through casual or satirical references. The first thing he said to me was: “This looks way more modern than I expected”.

To me, that reaction proved how universal the film really is. While there is certainly commentary on the United States' actions in Vietnam, this isn't a film about that war specifically. The setting is secondary to its themes; it could've been set 100 years ago, or it could be set today and the only thing that would change is the weaponry used in combat. My room mate's last comment, after passing by a few more times was: “How come I haven't seen Marlon Brando yet? Wasn't he billed as one of the main characters?”. He didn't check back in after, which I think was apt given the film's conclusion.


Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	apocalypse.jpg
Views:	197
Size:	209.8 KB
ID:	84892  



Apocalypse Now (1979)


After all the negativity towards the longer cuts here, I watched the theatrical one. This was probably my third viewing; the first one was as a kid, and the second early 2000s (unlike I initially thought, this second one must have been Redux, as based on Hearts of Darkness, I've certainly seen the French plantation scene). There's a clear trend in my opinion of the film after each viewing, and thankfully, it's an upward trend.

For the most part, Apocalypse Now looks absolutely stunning. It has this old-school Italian feel to its visuals, and I love it. The style is there to support the film, too, and not just prancing for its own sake. The way it focuses more and more on darkness, the closer we get to Kurtz, and in the end, almost like in Demons, the blackness becomes close to all-consuming.

There's this growing insanity in the film's world. Maybe it tips too far into the absurd at times, but I like how reality slowly gives in to a dream or nightmare. Maybe Coppola didn't mean it that way, but I love how the ending is, again, almost Lovecraftian; madness from knowing too much, only the horror remains.

On the negative side, I think the acting is a little uneven, and it's a little too much like a road movie for me (there's no real story, but the film flows from one event to another). I don't have any big complaints, though, and I absolutely loved this one.

__________________




Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)

Steven Spielberg and George Lucas struck pay dirt with one of the most beloved and successful action adventure flicks of all time: Raiders of the Lost Ark. A movie so successful that it spawned three more movies in the franchise and even inspired a TV series.

But there's a dirty little secret about Lucas' & Spielberg's Raiders of the Lost Ark...They ripped off an earlier, largely unknown film Secret of the Inca's (1954). Now there's nothing wrong with being inspired by previous work and there's even nothing wrong with copying a character and storyline, but only if you give the original film credit...and Spielberg and Lucas didn't credit Secret of the Incas and that amounts to plagiarism.

I had seen Secret of the Incas a couple of years ago and had no idea of it's connection to Raiders of the Lost Ark at that time. But it was instantly clear to me as I watched it that the look of Indiana Jones and his mannerisms was lifted from Charlton Heston's character. The story line is also very similar. Even shot for shot there are similarities that can only be labeled as rip offs....
Raiders of the Lost Ark costume designer Deborah Nadoolman revealed that the crew watched Secret of the Incas together multiple times...and thought it was strange they never officially admitted the influence.
All that makes me think less of Spielberg and Lucas. As far as Raiders of the Lost Ark, I hadn't seen it in 20 years and wasn't all that impressed with last night's viewing. It's all action with little development of the Indiana Jones character and in that way the film reminds me of the numerous Bond films where 007 is a 1 dimensional character who's soul purpose is to have hair raising adventure after adventure. If you like that sort of thing than Raiders is tops. Me, I prefer Secret of the Incas with a much more colorful and caddish Harry Steel and originality to boot...think I'll watch that one tonight.



Women will be your undoing, Pépé
I remember your review of Secret of the Incas, CR and like now, I was very curious to see the blatant similarities nevermind watching Heston playing that character.
I've done a few of those "Hey, wait a minute," moments when watching older films and seeing a modern film's very probable reference and rare acknowledgment of inspiration.
And this isn't the first time Lucas claimed originality when it wasn't. I do remember it took quite a while for him to admit the source for a chunk of Star Wars.
__________________
What I actually said to win MovieGal's heart:
- I might not be a real King of Kinkiness, but I make good pancakes
~Mr Minio



I remember your review of Secret of the Incas, CR and like now, I was very curious to see the blatant similarities nevermind watching Heston playing that character.
I've done a few of those "Hey, wait a minute," moments when watching older films and seeing a modern film's very probable reference and rare acknowledgment of inspiration.
And this isn't the first time Lucas claimed originality when it wasn't. I do remember it took quite a while for him to admit the source for a chunk of Star Wars.
Gosh did I review Secret of the Incas? I'll have to go and take a look at. What film was Star Wars supposedly based on?



Let the night air cool you off
Baby Face

I'm told this is a feminist movie... or something. Well, I'm not a feminist and I don't really see this is a feminist movie. I'm all for people taking advantage of their opportunities and resources to make their living and to fend for themselves, including using their body to do so. I don't really see it as being any different than using your money or position to achieve your goals or get what you want though. I think by doing this, it might make you a sh*tty person, but that's not my position to cast that judgment on you. Do what you gotta do, but I don't really have to enjoy watching it. Plus it doesn't really make a whole lot of sense, because there seemed to be a bunch times where the real life equivalent would have just been the guy saying the girl made a move on him and the girl getting fired on the spot, because it's not like these guys wouldn't have been having affairs with other women at the time. It's not like Stanwyck's character is the only slut on the block, ya know? This movie treats these guys as though they didn't really know p*ssy existed outside of this one woman. These dudes are dudes with power and money, that banker dude would have been yachting out to the 1930s equivalent of Epstein's Island. It's hard to buy in to this one woman bringing all of these men to their knees, maybe a couple low-level simps, sure. And no doubt, there have been some gold-diggers who managed to snag some dumbass old rich guy into marriage, but I'm not buying this story of the woman rising through the ranks unimpeded while all of these dudes are out here killing themselves over her. Or I just don't like this story because I am a masculinist. (Googled to see if masculinist is a thing, kinda lame to see that it is actually a thing.) I don't really think Stanwyck could pull this performance off, I think it needed someone that could pull off trashy-slutty a little better.




Jaws (1975) -


(SPOILER WARNING)

I didn't revisit this film before writing this review, but that's only because I've seen it several times (once a couple months ago, in fact), so the film is still really fresh in my memory. As great as it is though, it's not my favorite kind of film to review since its strengths (the shift from a comparably slower police procedural thriller in the first half to survival horror in the second half, the mayor's poor handling of the situation, Quint's USS Indianapolis monologue, several iconic shark scenes, the soundtrack), have already been analyzed to death, so when I discuss those aspects, I feel like I'm just repeating things that many other people have already said. Therefore, I'll instead talk about some other aspects I like about the film which aren't brought up as often.

Quint's aforementioned USS Indianapolis monologue is great and it could be argued that it's the origin of his rough outward personality, but I think his character is more complex than that. On the surface, his "tough guy" demeanor seems to represent masculinity or manliness, but the more you analyze his behavior, the more pathetic he appears as a character. He's an arrogant, obsession-fueled narcissist who's willing to put Brody and Hooper in danger to kill the shark (at one point, he even goes as far to prevent Brody from calling for help by smashing a radio). His view appears to be that acting like a dick to everyone around him gives him a sense of manliness. While Quint's USS Indianapolis monologue is an excellent scene though, none of the actions he mentions in that speech (which mainly consist of him floating in the water for several hours and hoping a shark doesn't pick him out of his fellow sailors to attack) seem braver than Hooper going underwater in a cage to try to kill the shark as a last resort or even Brody coping with his fears and setting out to hunt the shark (more on that later). Quint failed to kill the shark and got himself killed in the process, while Brody killed the shark instead. Compared to Brody and Hooper, Quint seemed significantly less manly and brave.

I also feel like Brody is an underpraised character. Most people I talk to generally say that Quint is the best character in the film but, while he's complex, too, I think there's also a lot to praise Brody for. Before the shark showed up, Brody was an outsider who left New York to get away from the violence and settle down into a more peaceful community. As the shark begins wreaking havoc on the town though, he has to put up with several things, like the mayor refusing to close the beach and the other townspeople having a somewhat unfavorable opinion of him (Alex Kintner's mother slapping Brody is a powerful scene since the mayor was much more at fault for getting Alex killed and deserved the slap instead). These are the people Brody has to save and he isn't happy about this. Ultimately though, while his concern for the town has somewhat of an effect on his decisions, Brody's concerns for his family's safety influence his decision to hunt the shark the most (simple scenes of Brody telling his kids not to play by the water or his reaction to one of his sons going into shock after an encounter with the shark give his decisions an extra layer of resonance). To briefly go back to my points on Quint, that Brody eventually overcomes his fears and kills the shark makes him the more courageous and manly of the two characters by a long shot. Really, Brody is a terrific character and his arc doesn't get nearly enough credit, in my opinion.

Overall, Jaws is an excellent film which gets better the more I rewatch it. That the quieter drama scenes prove to be just as, if not, more memorable than the shark scenes is truly something special that few horror films I've seen have been able to accomplish.

Next Up: L'Amour Braque



Just started rewatching Safety Last! Let's see if I can catch up
__________________
Check out my podcast: The Movie Loot!



Cure -


This is a superb psychological thriller in the same vein - and that may be even scarier than - Se7en. Kôji Yakusho is very good as Takabe for how he lets you get inside his head. The detective's increasingly strained efforts to avoid Mamiya's influence became my own almost immediately. The way the movie shows his struggle's impact to his sanity such as his dream with the bus in the clouds have a lot to do with this. Masato Hagiwara's performance as the villain, however, may be the movie's secret weapon. I like how Mamiya's tendency to never stay in one place as well as his bad posture make him seem more like a spirit than a human being. Also, even though the influence of what comes out of the Edison cylinder may explain it, I approve of the movie not 100% defining what motivates Mamiya to spread his influence. Does he get pleasure from it? Is it a survival skill? Is it an addiction? I also have to give credit to Tokusha Kikomura's unique camerawork for how its wide angles highlight the architecture as much as the people, which put me into an oddly satisfying and contemplative state. It made me think about what is happening as much as it made me feel (and be unsettled) about it, if that makes sense.

With all of that said, why is this movie so scary? How it raises the possibility of randomly encountering someone who throws your life into disarray is one reason. In this regard, it reminds me of Fallen and the first season of Fargo, which it undoubtedly influenced. However, what really got me is how it not only made me wonder if just a little self-examination would make me throw my morality out the window, but also what thoughts would make me do it. It ends up being one of the best psychological thrillers I've ever seen, not to mention a great Hall of Fame pick. It's also more proof that maybe, just maybe, Japan does it better.