What Was The Last Movie You Watched?

[Trenchfriend]

Tatort: Moltke (1988) from VHS. A very good Schimanski Episode! Hard-boiled actioner, no sugar-coating.

 

[Worf]

Nope, just checkin out my "new" VHS-recorder. Everything seems fine! The german tone VHS, of course.

"Boot" is still on DVD, same "Red October".

PS:
How would you have decide? Attacking the japanese carrier force, heading for Pearl or not?

As Marshall Ney said... "I ride to the sound of the guns!" Head to where the shootins a goin' on and pitch in!

Worf

 

[Edward]

I don't know if it's unique, but I still love the adult adressed one-liners, kids probably not really get. And the german synchro is simply top-notch. Unbelievable perfect!
But I never got, why it's non-age restricted. A little too hard stuff for little kids, in my opinion.

In the UK, the BBFC certification includes 'U' (Universal - suitable for all, "family films"), and 'Uc' (Universal, specifically aimed at children). The line they take for a U is that you can have the odd adult gag here and there if only an adult would spot it, but if they dwell on it long enough that Kids will pick up on it and be all "Mummy, why's that funny? What does it mean?", it goes up to a 12A, where you either have to be 12 or with a responsible adult to get in. The 12A replaced an earlier, hard-age limit 12 certificate that was introduced with the first Tim Burton Batman picture in 1989. In 1993, Mrs Doubtfire was given a 12 certificate. Controversially, at that. I didn't know until years later that it was based on a much-beloved by legions of little girls children's book called Madame Doubtfire. Much of the would-be built in audience for the book was unable to see it on release because of the age limit. What got it as 12 over a U was the protracted conversation where "power tools" are discussed, in context the term being used as a comedy euphemism for sex toys. A single usage would have been considered something that would go over kids' heads, but the repeated use of the term in a conversation of several minutes' duration emphasised it to the point where it would not escape their notice. It's been a very long time since I saw Aladdin, but from memory anything considered not entirely kid friendly is thrown away very quickly, not dwelt on.

 

[Trenchfriend]

Same excellent as in german synchro!

 

[Trenchfriend]

A thing comes to my mind.

I never saw French Connection I & II, which movie fans often talk about. Should I watch?

 

[Edward]

Edward... Don't get your hopes up about Renfield. It's essentially a one-joke idea, mainly notable for giving Nic Cage a shot at grotesquely overplaying Dracula.

I'd figured as much.... though tbh, that rather appeals. Cage's appeal as an actor in much of his work is akin to Bruce Campbell. It's a different style than realism.... Cage is a more OTT player in some respects...

And we've discussed AMC's Interview with the Vampire series and how every decision they've made to take it further from a straight adaptation a la the 1994 Neal Jordan film has improved it. (Conversely, every decision they've made with Mayfair Witches is a mistake; so far, the second season is an even worse mess than the first.) Really interesting stuff there, I'm looking forward to next season.

It's definitely deviated, albeit that in some respects it remains truer to the spirit of the books. Jordan's film was of its time, though in that I suspect had it been more direct about Lestat and Louis being lovers it would not have been as big a mainstream release at the time. The Paris set sequences last season were beautiful - particularly the motorcycle riding by night, just divinely captured. I do enjoy how the shift in period setting let us see Paris in another era. There were to my eye nods to classic, post-war French cinema here and there (the little of it I know). I've not as of yet read all the books - I think we've gone in terms of sourced material, such as that is used, beyond where I left off (I read the first book many years agon, I need to get to the others. Not honestly sure about the second...).

Some of the most fascinating cracks at the vampire mythos in recent times have been in indie films like Only Lovers Left Alive (Jim Jarmusch) and Byzantium (Neil Jordan again). You've seen these, right?

Byzantium, yes- loved it. Only Lovers not yet; we've not currently got a discplayer wired up, and it persists in not being available on the streamers we have subscriptions for. Time I had another hunt for it, though, just in case that has changed.

And of course I dug I'm Not There. Using multiple actors was a great idea for Dylan the shapeshifter...

I didn't think much of Elvis - I run hot and cold with Baz Luhrmann's overkill approach. But I was impressed with Sofia Coppola's Priscilla. It showed a surprisingly nuanced take on Elvis... even though it's mainly another trapped-girl story like many of her films (The Virgin Suicides, Lost In Translation, Marie Antoinette).

It's not what it could have been, that's true. I think I went in with minimal expectations because Baz Luhrman - with the rare exception (Gatsby being one such) I despise his work. I doubt I could have loathed Moulin Rouge more if it had come from the pen of Richard Curtis. Its main weakness for me, though, was that it's clearly a Gracelands-Approved product, hence we were always gonig to get a weird take on Priscilla and her leaving that danced around and away from anything controversial or negative about either party. Visually it was great, and young Austin Butler was a superb casting. I enjoyed it as a sort of cartoon of Elvis, in much the same way as I also enjoyed The Notorious Bettie Page way back when, but certainly in terms of 'the true story' it was lacking. I suspect that will only be made many years from now. Until then, I'd adore to see Elvis and the She-Vampires, from memory the title of the un-made sequel teased in the credits to Bubba Ho-Tep.

But sorry, I gotta disagree about Walk Hard. I think it's brilliant. Of course, I have nothing against Spinal Tap, though I personally prefer some of Chris Guest's other satires, like A Mighty Wind and For Your Consideration.

Guest's stuff is all wonderful. A Mighty Wind was a joy. Back in 2009, I was actually at the Tap's "one Night Only World Tour" in Webley Stadium, cracking show. The Folksmen appeared as a support act (Harry Shearer in female mode, as memory serves) to Spinal Tap. The audience reaction was priceless - a lot of people didn't get it and looked very confused, as clearly they'd only seen Spinal Tap. Great gig. Criminally undersold as I recall... I got five tickets on eBay for the price of one and took a bunch of pals. It was a great night.

 

[Fading Fast]

A thing comes to my mind.

I never saw French Connection I & II, which movie fans often talk about. Should I watch?

I liked French Connection I. It's a good, gritty 1970s NYC drug, crime drama. French Connection II was okay, but felt forced to me.

 

[Edward]

I liked French Connection I. It's a good, gritty 1970s NYC drug, crime drama. French Connection II was okay, but felt forced to me.

I remember many years ago on a cinema trip with my parents seeing a Disney film called The London Connection. I assume there's no connection - other than maybe Disney glomming onto a popular soundalike name?

 

[Fading Fast]

Young and Innocent from 1937 with Super-Nova Pilbeam, Derrick De Marney, and Percy Marmont

Hitchcock wasn't famous yet when he made Young and Innocent relatively early in his career, but he was already Hitchcock.

Young and Innocent is a pre-Hollywood, low-budget Hitchcock effort that has so many of his telltale traits that even a casual fan could probably guess who directed it; plus, you can't take your eyes off the quirky-looking female lead, played by Nova Pilbeam.

A young man is falsely accused of murder. To prove his innocence—the police are convinced of his guilt—he escapes and, by chance, "enlists" the help of a cute young girl – Ms. Pilbeam – who just happens to be the daughter of the local chief constable, played by Percy Marmont.

The young man, played by Derrick De Marney, somewhat tricks and somewhat shanghais Pilbeam into helping him initially, but eventually he convinces her of his innocence. Of course, she's committing a crime by helping him, but she thinks he's innocent and she knows he's cute.

It's still a bad look for a chief constable's daughter, but in for a penny...as the expression goes. So the movie becomes the two of them on the road, in Pilbeam's dicey car, as they follow tenuous clues trying to exculpate De Marney.

It’s all what would become standard Hitchcock. Pilbeam and De Marney elude the police, despite several close calls, while falling in love – even as Pilbeam realizes she might be ruining her life and her father’s career.

There's more standard Hitchcock as they chase down De Marney's stolen raincoat to prove he didn't have the belt from that coat – the one used to kill the woman he's accused of murdering. It sounds as flimsy on screen as it does here.

While the raincoat and belt isn't a MacGuffin, it is something the characters care a lot more about than you do as all you're thinking is, "Shut up about the raincoat and belt already."

What you care about are the two youngsters on the road, falling in love while trying to prove his innocence. There's even a foreshadowing of the kid's birthday party from HItch's famous The Birds (1963) where Pilbeam and De Marney get stuck at Pilbeam's pre-adolescent niece's party.

A lot then happens quickly: their car runs out of gas; it falls into a sinkhole; they find the raincoat, but not the belt; Pilbeam returns home defeated; her father tenders his resignation in disgrace; De Marney turns himself in to clear Pilbeam; and finally, a last-minute break might save the day.

We've seen all of these twists in Hitch's later films, which makes this movie somewhat like an archeological dig into old Hitchcock soil. It's also entertaining as a standalone work because it's a well-directed movie – and because of the offbeat Nova Pilbeam.

Pilbeam – with features that are more interesting than classically beautiful, and with whirly-twirly hair that even professional hairdressers can't control – pulls this movie along by the scruff of its neck, as she is the glue holding everything together.

She shows an impressive range of emotions with subtle facial movements, while having a screen presence that makes you simply care what happens to her. Maybe it was her quirky looks or rat's nest of hair, but it's hard to understand why Hollywood didn't come calling.

These pre-Hollywood Hitchcock movies have a distinct charm today as their low budgets make their special effects almost laughable – look for all the small scale models, especially in the train yard scenes. Compared to his later efforts, these are like Reader's Digest Hitchcock movies.

Young and Innocent is due for a little more love from the Hitchcock fans, but of course, that requires a new generation to take an interest in these very old movies. If they do, they'll find not a great movie, but a good, short picture from Hitch's pre-fame days that is well worth seeing.

And if nothing else, there's always spun-out-into-orbit Nova Pilbeam to watch.