The 8th MoFo Hall of Fame

Ha, you said it not me

I've seen My Cousin Vinny a few times. 10/10. Love Pesci, the man's a genius! Marisa too. Won an Oscar, I think. He got into trouble with just about EVERYONE in the town! And then he finally snapped when Marisa ticked him off about her pregnancy, I think. After he listed all his enemies (not only human, he was even fighting a train) to her he said: "What else have you to add to that pile?"

Marisa didn't tick him off about her pregnancy. It was that her "biological clock is (tap tap tap) ticking".

Anatomy of a Murder (1959)

This is a terrific courtroom drama that easily goes from being light, and almost comical, one minute, to being tense and dramatic the next minute. Most of the performances are top-notch, with the one exception being Lee Remick, however I'm not really sure if this is an acting issue or a character issue.

What I mean by this is that her character is the one weak link in the movie for me, mainly because she doesn't make sense. For a woman who was supposedly raped, and then her husband murdered her rapist, she's in good spirits throughout the whole movie. Shouldn't she show some type of emotion that makes us believe that she was really raped?

However that brings us to the next issue with this movie, which is actually a plus that makes the movie so intense. Her husband's defense to the murder is that he was basically insane when he committed the murder because his wife was raped by the victim, so if we aren't sure whether or not she was really raped, is he actually guilty of murder?

It creates an interesting twist in the storyline because regardless of the jury's verdict, we're still left to wonder if they got it right.


In regards to Citizen Rules' question comparing Kathryn Grant to Judy Garland, no, I don't see much of a resemblance to Judy Garland. However Grant did remind me a little bit of Elinor Donahue.

Bump...nice decisions going on here. Let's have some more. Hopefully since I'm the host, I'll be more active in the discussions than in the past.

I will be interested to watch Anatomy again because I don't remember being put off by Remick at all. Hopefully you guys won't taint my second viewing of a new favorite.

__________________
Letterboxd

I wouldn't say that I was "put off by Remick", but IMO she was the weak link in the movie. But that was because of the way her character is portrayed as being flirtatious and unemotional, and I just don't find that believable for a character who has been through what she supposedly went through. If the character was supposed to be portrayed like that, then you have to wonder if she lied to her husband about the rape, in which case, was he really justified in killing her alleged rapist?

Remick acts like a party girl, which you'd expect from somebody who was probably messing around behind her husband's back and he beat her up and went gunning for who she was cheating with. That's one way to look at it and totally consistent with her behavior. I'm surprised nobody mentioned the witty performance of Joseph N. Welch as the judge. He's the guy who shamed Joseph McCarthy before the nation.

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

And if you believe that, then the assumption is that Quill didn't rape her. So did she lie to her husband, and say that she was raped, which means that he thought he was killing her rapist, or did he just go kill the guy she was cheating with, and then they lied to cover it up, which makes him guilty of murder? So was he guilty, or not? Did the jury get it right?

I definitely think that doubt was a big part of the story. At least I took that away from it. In the end I certainly landed on To be honest I am about a year removed from my first viewing so I will have to tell you why after my re-watch. I didn't find her behavior odd because I think she was certainly trying to play Stewart's character a bit either way. She is a bit of a femme fatale like in a noir.

Based on the trial and all the character's behavior, I think he was guilty. He was obviously a liar. If you don't know what to think of the couple. just recall the film's ending. Jimmy presented a great case, but he was bamboozled.

Why is the assumption Quill didn't rape her if she was a party girl? Those two things are not mutually exclusive. I am not even saying I disagree that what transpired was left ambiguous. It very well could be but you seem to be saying if she is one thing then the rape didn't happen and if she is the other thing then that isn't the case. I think you can two different conclusions and read her two different ways.

I agree that doubt is a big part of the story, that's why I called it a plus. Even though the movie has a clear ending with the jury's decision, it's still an ambiguous ending in that we don't know if they got it right. We're left to decide for ourselves what we believe really happened, and that's one of the things that makes it a great movie.

I'm not saying that the assumption is that he didn't rape her because she's a party girl. I'm saying that the assumption is that he didn't rape her because he was the guy that she was cheating on her husband with, so they already had a relationship, and it's unlikely that he raped her.

My opinion is

Well, you can say that she told her husband that she was raped. There was no evidence that she was. Quill liked to drink but he didn't have a history of attacking women. There's the panties at the end, but who put them in the laundry chute? Gazzara was angry at both his wife and the alleged rapist. I'm not saying it's cut-and-dried, but I like my interpretation. It's just way more juicy.

I will weigh back in after my second watch.

Was she raped or did she lie? That's the underpinning of the movie. We see that justice is not clear cut and truth is never an absolute. All we know about those two crimes are from testimony and interviews.

Preminger intelligently avoided showing us the rape and the murder. That way we can go along for the ride as we try to uncover the truth.

The prosecuting attorney claims Laura willingly had sex with the murdered man and that her husband beat her up for cheating on him. Remember the scene where she is asked to explain why her husband made her swear an oath on a Rosary that she was raped. But nothing is clear cut. The defense denies that and has all their own evidence and reasons.

Yes Sean you need to rewatch your film I loved this film, as it's so intelligent. Lee Remick not being the perfect actresses doesn't matter to me.

I just got my Paths of Glory DVD so I'll watch that Saturday. I have to finish my Goodfellas write-up but I'm feeling lazy.

Well I haven't even started yet. In fact I've only seen one movie total in the past 12 days.

Was it that three hour epic you hated?