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.

 

[Fading Fast]

Unashamed from 1932 with Helen Twelvetrees, Robert Young, Monroe Owsley and Lewis Stone


Unashamed takes full advantage of being a pre-code-era movie, ripping through several taboos and controversial subjects with passion and thoughtfulness in its short seventy-seven-minute runtime.

To understand Unashamed, you have to recognize that a girl’s reputation truly and deeply meant something in that era, and that juries then (like today) often made decisions based on "the unwritten law" – a belief that something is right or wrong despite not being codified into law.

Helen Twelvetrees plays the spoiled daughter of the wealthy Ogden family who wants to marry smarmy Harry Swift, played by Monroe Owsley, who really only wants her for her $3 million trust fund.

We learn from Owsley's father, an immigrant and successful small business owner, that his son changed his name because he was ashamed of his family, but not so ashamed that he won't take money from his father so that he can socialize with the rich.

If Twelvetrees' Dad won't consent to the marriage, and he won't, because he sees Owsley for who he really is, Twelvetrees will lose her trust fund.

Owsley's bitterly cynical scheme, in response, is to go away for a night with Twelvetrees and, then, present the father with an ultimatum: let me marry your daughter with her $3 million or I'll ruin her reputation by telling everyone that she spent the night with me.

(The following happens early and is the central conflict of the story, but if you’d rather not know more, stop reading here.) Upon hearing all this, Twelvetrees' close and loving brother, played by Robert Young, shoots Owsley dead in cold blood.

The rest of the movie centers on Young's trial for murder. His lawyer, wonderfully played by Lewis Stone, tells Young and his family that Young's only chance is relying on the "unwritten law," where the jury will find him innocent because he was defending his sister's honor.

It would probably work, but Twelvetrees is having none of it because she's furious at her father and brother. She believes her brother should pay the price – go to the electric chair – for the murder he committed. So a sister is about to let her brother die because he killed her lover, a lover who was clearly only interested in her for her money.

Playing creepily in the background is Young and Twelvetrees’ relationship, which hints at Young, and perhaps both of them, harboring an unnatural physical interest in the other. They kiss on the mouth an awful lot.

The trial is engaging entertainment as the lawyers battle with warp-speed dialogue, the judge makes critical split-second rulings, witnesses offer surprising testimony, the jury is often aghast, and the outcome hinges on a dramatic last-minute development. It’s 1932, but the trial scenes hold their own against anything modern movies have to offer.

Under the steady direction of Harry Beaumont, who keeps this complex story moving at a rapid pace without it becoming confusing, Twelvetrees (a very pretty woman who would find a coach seat narrow), Young, Owsley, and Stone give impressive and nuanced performances as they create complex and engaging characters.

Unashamed is pre-code movie making at its best. Yes, it’s technically clunky by today’s standards, but it takes on several big issues – sex, reputations, the death penalty, filial duty, incest, and the morality of the "unwritten" law – with thoughtfulness, insight, and a surprising amount of balance that has been lost in today’s "my picture, my politics" style of filmmaking.

 

[Zombie_61]

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.

I have to agree with Fading Fast. French Connection I was, I thought, a solid "Big City Detectives solve the crime" story, while French Connection II has always felt like the studio's attempt to try to cash in on the first movie's success far too long after the first movie had been forgotten. Aside from Gene Hackman's performance, French Connection II is just overly long and boring.

 

[Fading Fast]

The Strange Love of Martha Ivers from 1946 with Barbara Stanwyck, Van Heflin and Kirk Douglas


The Strange Love of Martha Ivers improves with each viewing, as its "noirishness" is better than its story. After a few viewings, you'll have its plot and characters down, so you can simply enjoy the interpersonal battles and wonderful noir details.

Barbara Stanwyck, Van Heflin, and Kirk Douglas play adult characters who were childhood friends in Iverstown, a factory town where Stanwyck's imperious aunt owns the factory. Early on we see an about ten-year-old Stanwyck hit her aunt with a cane causing her death.

Douglas, whose character was weak and obsequious as a boy, saw the event and kept quiet about Stanwyck's cover story. Van Heflin's character, then a boy, had left town just before the event happened.

Fast forward twenty or so years, and when Heflin's car breaks down, he finds himself waylaid in Iverstown. He learns that Stanwyck and Douglas have married. She married him to keep him quiet and he married her for her money and power, plus he might really love her.

Stanwyck now runs the factory, and Douglas is the town's DA. He and his wife have a lock on corruption in Iverstown. We also learn later that these two framed a vagabond for the murder of the aunt. Their marriage is poisoned by the sins that spawned and maintain it.

Heflin is the change agent – the Tolstoy "a stranger comes to town –" as his presence intrigues Stanwyck and scares Douglas, who, even though he isn't one, can recognize a real man. Tucked into this story is Lizabeth Scott, playing a parolee and Heflin's love interest.

Douglas is convinced Heflin has come back to blackmail them; whereas, Stanwyck is hoping for some extracurricular boom-boom with Heflin. One senses she and Douglas, who's often drunk, aren't very busy in their bedroom.

From here, Heflin investigates the past; Douglas tries to have him chased out of town by hired thugs; Stanwyck gets her Heflin boom-boom; Scott and Douglas get jealous; and Heflin gets mad as all the truths and deceit spill out. All their lives are a moral tangle.

It works, though, because the three leads are that good and the atmosphere is spot-on noirish. Stanwyck is outstanding as the powerful woman trying to bury her past. Douglas, in his film debut, is excellent as the weak man who resents the wife who made him a success.

Heflin is in his sweet spot as the stranger you're never quite sure of. He seems to have real character where it counts even if he's not opposed to cutting a few corners for convenience. Scott, who can act, is a bit sleepy in this one but adequate in a supporting role.

Iverstown is a dreary place dominated by a huge smokestack factory, seedy bars, and corruption. Stanwyck's mansion is a foreboding relic. Heflin feels like the only honest thing in the town, and he's a gambler by profession – an "angles guy," by Douglas' description.

You know you're in noirland when the gambler is the good guy and the district attorney is the one you have to fear. The movie's one false note – and it's a big one – is its climax (no spoilers coming).

The Motion Picture Production Code required an ending that untangled all the immorality, but it rings false. The better ending, the real-life one, can be seen if you lop off the last five minutes of the movie that starts just before the last two gunshots.

The Strange Love of Martha Ivers is film noir grafted over timeless melodrama set in a typical mid-century factory town. Its average story and forced ending are overcome by its first-rate noir atmosphere and its complex characters brought to life by some of the era's best acting talent.