TCM: The Greatest Movie Channel

[Milburn Stone]

Somewhat TCM related...I usually think the TCM "In Memoriam" beats the Oscar version all to hell, but this was one year the Academy held its own. Maybe not up there with TCM, but at least not leagues behind. (Other than, you know, showing someone who wasn't dead. Hey, nobody's perfect.) :)

[SeanC]

Last night's screening of To Each His Own was the first time I'd had the opportunity to see Olivia de Havilland's first Oscar win.  The film overall is a pretty solid melodrama, carried almost entirely by de Havilland herself.  Also, I'm rather surprised all the stuff about premarital sex and an illegitimate child were allowed past the Production Code, though maybe all the attendant angst made it okay.

[Crisopera]

To Each His Own is one of my all-time favorites.  De Havilland is so, so good, and, as I've stated many times, the direction of Mitchell Leisen is beautiful.  It's also one of the few 1940s film to look pretty period-accurate (costumes by Edith Head, art direction by Roland Anderson & Hans Dreier), and one of the VERY few to let a middle-aged woman look middle-aged, not suddenly aged to crone status.

[Crisopera]

Sorry for the double post.

Edited March 2, 2017 by Crisopera

[Rinaldo]

7 hours ago, SeanC said:

Last night's screening of To Each His Own was the first time I'd had the opportunity to see Olivia de Havilland's first Oscar win.  The film overall is a pretty solid melodrama, carried almost entirely by de Havilland herself.  Also, I'm rather surprised all the stuff about premarital sex and an illegitimate child were allowed past the Production Code, though maybe all the attendant angst made it okay.

I wrote about this the last time TCM showed it so, I (at first) held off this time, but I'll certainly concur. De Havilland really earned her pay, and her stardom, and her Oscar, with this performance; it's just beautifully modulated in every way, and the script and production elements all work together. The book about Mitchell Leisen makes it clear that he, at first, undertook the film a bit unwillingly at his star's request, thinking it a corny melodrama. But he still gave it his professional best in pre-production (overseeing all that period-accurate design -- he had been a designer himself, of course)... and then after about a week of shooting started to get excited as he saw that they could make something special, and in the end was very enthusiastic.

As @Crisopera says, it's unusually fine overall (there are a number of these "Madame X" sort of films, the guilty mother who re-encounters her son as an adult without his knowing who she is, but this stands out above the others in my opinion), and the good judgment about Jody's "look" at each stage of her life is one evidence of that: she's young and lovely at the start, and ages only the appropriate amount (after all, the head of a cosmetics empire would know how to take care of her looks, even if she doesn't care about being glamorous).

The book makes it clear that they had plenty of discussions with the Production Code about the story elements, and they would have to give a little on one point (instead of using the word "bastard" -- even though they argued it was being used in a technical sense, not as a curse -- he's imagined as "the little boy who has no father") to get a concession elsewhere. 

[Milburn Stone]

Is this the Leisen book?

https://www.amazon.com/Hollywood-director-career-Mitchell-Leisen/dp/B0006CGD1C/

[Rinaldo]

Yes.

[LauraAnders]

On 2017-02-26 at 8:33 PM, prican58 said:

Any thoughts on this?

 

http://1166199035.rsc.cdn77.org/TCM-00125_NoirAlley-Schedule.pdf

Most of the films listed are well worth watching. However ...

I want to warn people about Detour. I thought it was a very terrible film. Of course, YMMV. I found it to be boring. It was as if the script was written by 100 monkeys and each one was re-writing the script that was originally written by another.

Brute Force is another. Despite the fact it starts Burt Lancaster and most of his films are very well done, this one isn't. It's about a prison in which the convicts are bullied by a sadistic guard. If I recall correctly, there is not a single woman in the cast. I can't remember any movie that had zero women but was also a good movie. I could be mistaken of course. But it just seems to be a stupid idea. Maybe it would apply just as well to a film without any men?

I've seen Shield for Murder before. Edmund O'Brien is one of my most favorite actors. But I can't seem to remember much about this one. It wasn't very outstanding. I'd like to hear what other people think of this one.

Out of the Past is very similar to The Killers. But The Killers is a much better movie. I would recommend to everyone that when Out of the Past is on, you should find a way to watch The Killers (stars Burt Lancaster) instead.

Finally, in the spirit of Black & White Film Noir, let me recommend one of the very best crime films I've ever seen. White Heat (1949) is a great film and I'm sure you will enjoy it as much or more as any of the other films on this list. Cagney and Edmund O'Brien and they are both at their very best!

Edited March 1, 2017 by LauraAnders

[Rinaldo]

1 hour ago, LauraAnders said:

I can't remember any movie that had zero women but was also a good movie.

Twelve Angry Men? Sleuth? Billy Budd?

1 hour ago, LauraAnders said:

Maybe it would apply just as well to a film without any men?

The Women? (I wouldn't defend it as a great movie, but it's proved resilient enough to survive the decades.)

I just don't think there's any rule about it, either way.

And I consider Out of the Past a minor classic, decidedly worth seeing. As is The Killers. See 'em both, I say. Moviegoing isn't a zero-sum game with one movie succeeding at the expense of another.

[Wiendish Fitch]

53 minutes ago, Rinaldo said:

Twelve Angry Men? Sleuth? Billy Budd?

 

And Lawrence of Arabia, don't forget that. Frankly, I'd rather a movie with no women than a movie where women are so bland and arbitrary, they may as well not be there (too many examples to list).

[3pwood]

And The Flight of the Phoenix -- the "real" one, from 1965 starring Jimmy Stewart.  I think there was a woman doing a belly dance in a mirage, but I don't remember any speaking parts for women.  

[Milburn Stone]

Locke is a great movie that only has one character on-camera, who happens to be Tom Hardy.

My Dinner with Andre only has two characters, both men--unless a waitress happens to wander by.

[Charlie Baker]

It's dated, it's stagy, because it is an adaptation of a play, but there are no women in the cast and it holds up as a pretty good time capsule movie, The Boys in the Band.

Detour is a cult classic of noir, which I know won't appeal to everyone. The film making is a little ragged, but it has an undeniable force--due largely to the unforgettable Ann Savage.

[Milburn Stone]

16 minutes ago, Charlie Baker said:

It's dated, it's stagy, because it is an adaptation of a play, but there are no women in the cast and it holds up as a pretty good time capsule movie, The Boys in the Band.

Detour is a cult classic of noir, which I know won't appeal to everyone. The film making is a little ragged, but it has an undeniable force--due largely to the unforgettable Ann Savage.

I'm in agreement with both parts of that, with the mild exception that I might go further than you in advocating for The Boys in the Band. I've only seen it the once, on its initial theatrical release oh-so-many years ago, but I remember thinking it was a pretty powerful film and not "stage bound" at all. (Despite taking place all on one apartment set.)

[Rinaldo]

I pretty much detest The Boys in the Band, but I suppose it has its place as a snapshot of a particular time and place. I would be surprised if anybody produces the play any more (with its message "our lives are inherently miserable under all the glitz, but they'd be better if only we could stop hating ourselves so much"). The movie suffices, for anybody who cares to see it.

[Charlie Baker]

Not to get too off-topic, but the off-Broadway company Transport Group did The Boys in the Band in 2010, and it was fairly well received, with reservations, as I recall. I didn't see it, and didn't desire to.  But I do think the movie works.

[ratgirlagogo]

9 hours ago, LauraAnders said:

I want to warn people about Detour. I thought it was a very terrible film. Of course, YMMV.

My mileage is definitely different from yours.  I think it's a masterpiece - from a director who always achieved amazing things with the tiny budgets and tiny shooting schedules of the limited-audience pictures he worked on for  most  of his career (B-horror, B-noir, African-American pictures, Yiddish pictures).  And as Charlie Baker said - Ann Savage.  One of the most astounding performances by any actress in the movies, ever.   

ETA: syntax syntax syntax.  grrrrrr.

Edited March 2, 2017 by ratgirlagogo

[LauraAnders]

Well, in the face of that powerful retort, I think I should take another look at Detour. Perhaps I mixed it up with another title. It wouldn't be the first time.

But,  I'd like to make sure that I didn't make a silly mistake and I thank you for speaking up

I really admire people who can offer a strong dissenting opinion - but do it in a way that doesn't offend the originator (I mean me - it's oh so early in the morning). So, thank you for your courteous dissenting opinion.

[Rinaldo]

The letter W has brought us to West Side Story. I don't care how much latter-day wisdom choose to disparage it (chorus boys & girls trying to pass for Puerto Ricans, studio sets after the first 20 minutes, all the vocal dubbing, the casting of <whoever a writer decides to dislike>, stage-bound Jerome Robbins choreography... you name it, I've heard them all) -- I just adore it. I flipped for it when I saw it in its original road-show engagement in a special theater in Chicago (I still have the souvenir program I bought!), and it still looks and sounds great to me.

[ratgirlagogo]

12 hours ago, LauraAnders said:

 

Well, in the face of that powerful retort, I think I should take another look at Detour. Perhaps I mixed it up with another title. It wouldn't be the first time......

 .......thank you for your courteous dissenting opinion.

Or, maybe you just didn't like it.  Plenty of people don't.  I just gave my own reasons for liking it.  In general this board has always been one of the more courteous ones on the site in my experience (as it was back at TWOP).  We all post here because we are passionate about these old movies - but without trying to speak for anyone but myself, I don't think I'm the only one who enjoys reading this board BECAUSE we often disagree.   

ETA: forgot to say that another thing I love about Detour is the use of I Can't Believe That You're In Love With Me - it's a lovely song of course and it's so great the way it  becomes more and more ominous as the film continues and the tension escalates. 

Edited March 3, 2017 by ratgirlagogo

[ratgirlagogo]

1 hour ago, Rinaldo said:

it still looks and sounds great to me.

Agreed. If more musicals had music as great as the music in West Side Story, I'd be a much bigger fan of musicals than I am. 

Edited March 3, 2017 by ratgirlagogo

[Charlie Baker]

I've seen West Side Story many times and it still works for me, as well.  That opening sequence is still thrilling. One thing I've noticed from my more recent viewings--this is a movie that, despite its length, really moves along, it has a pace, unlike a certain other movie of a classic musical we have discussed here before, that I do love but I admit drags a bit. Not to name names, oh, all right, My Fair Lady. :-)

[Milburn Stone]

I like a lot of things about the movie West Side Story, and I love the soundtrack album no more or less, averaged out, than I love the original cast album (both have ways in which they're better than the other), and I think I could actually sign on to loving the movie, if it weren't for Richard Beymer. I just can't accept him as Tony. Might be why I love the album more than the movie--I can hear Jimmy Bryant's voice without seeing Richard Beymer's face.

[Rinaldo]

Fair comment, I must admit. He's not a deal-breaker for me, but it would've been nice to have someone who really zinged as Tony. I can't say that any of the alternative casting they considered would have been much better, starting with Elvis Presley (I think he's underrated as an actor and could have been interesting in a wider range than he ended up playing onscreen, but in this role -- just imagine if he'd agreed when approached). Others they auditioned, we're told, include Warren Beatty (who also auditioned for the original stage production, I believe), Tab Hunter, Anthony Perkins, Russ Tamblyn (who of course was chosen for Riff), Burt Reynolds, Troy Donahue, Bobby Darin, Richard Chamberlain, Dennis Hopper, and Gary Lockwood. Of them all, I can best see Bobby Darin in the role, and even that's a stretch -- but he had surprises in him. (I like Perkins and Chamberlain, but as a gang-adjacent kid of the city streets?) 

Come to think of it, Tony is always a real casting challenge, possibly because the authors asked for too much (or, contrariwise, didn't really flesh him out into a whole person). Has he ever been really well played? (Nobody gets to say "Larry Kert" unless they saw him in the role.)

[Ohwell]

Just wanted to pop in and say that I think Warren Beatty would have worked for Tony.  Richard Beymer just didn't work for me.

[Milburn Stone]

15 minutes ago, Ohwell said:

Just wanted to pop in and say that I think Warren Beatty would have worked for Tony.  Richard Beymer just didn't work for me.

I could see that, and I actually think I could also see Anthony Perkins. It's been a long long time since I've seen Fear Strikes Out, but I kind of remember he was a convincing lower-middle-class troubled youth in that, and I can imagine the actor making the transition to convincing lower-middle-class troubled street youth. Of all names mentioned, I think Perkins would be my pick. He also could sing, and might have been up to the musical challenges of the role.

[Ohwell]

36 minutes ago, Milburn Stone said:

Of all names mentioned, I think Perkins would be my pick. He also could sing, and might have been up to the musical challenges of the role.

Oops, I forgot about the singing part, I was just thinking about looks. : )   I never heard Beatty sing so I don't know if he could have.  Never knew that Perkins could sing though.  Interesting. 

[Milburn Stone]

15 minutes ago, Ohwell said:

Oops, I forgot about the singing part, I was just thinking about looks. : )   I never heard Beatty sing so I don't know if he could have.  Never knew that Perkins could sing though.  Interesting. 

Oh yes. :) He put out two or three LPs on Epic and RCA in the late fifties, was in the original Broadway cast of Frank Loesser's 1960 Greenwillow (and can be heard on the RCA cast album), and took part in Ben Bagley's George Gershwin Revisited album on MGM.

Edited March 3, 2017 by Milburn Stone

[Wiendish Fitch]

Am I the only one who doesn't mind Richard Beymer that much as Tony? Okay, yeah, he's clean-cut to a fault, and he's not the most convincing gang member ever... but then, neither are most of the actors. I think Rita Moreno said it best: "Tony is a workhorse role. No one is going to love you for it."

It's very true: Tony doesn't get to be as dynamic as Riff or Bernardo, he's the innocent Everyman. It's very much a straight arrow part, and it's never as colorful as it could be. I think, overall, Beymer did the best he could. 

"Something's Coming" is one of my favorite songs from West Side Story (and yes, I know that isn't Beymer singing), which is saying something, because I love almost all of them (don't care for "One Hand, One Heart", but that's just me).

[Rinaldo]

1 hour ago, Milburn Stone said:

I could see that, and I actually think I could also see Anthony Perkins. It's been a long long time since I've seen Fear Strikes Out...

I've never seen that, and maybe it would change my imagine of Perkins. I've seen in quite a few roles, though, and excellent as he generally was in them, they're all in kind of a -- how do I say this? -- "soft" range of personality. I know that actors exist to act and not be exactly who they are in everyday life, but each actor also has a "radius" of how far they can get from themselves (some bigger radius than others), and I don't see Perkins's radius as getting to Tony. Still, it's an intriguing thought; had he been given the role, he might have risen to it. I endorse visiting that alternate reality, along with the one where Darin got the part (apparently he was offered it but don't want to cancel his concert schedule); his performance in Captain Newman M.D. (as a soldier suffering from what we'd now call PTSD) shows the skills he had on tap.

28 minutes ago, Milburn Stone said:

Oh yes. :) He put out two or three LPs on Epic and RCA in the late fifties, was in the original Broadway cast of Frank Loesser's 1960 Greenwillow (and can be heard on the RCA cast album), and took part in Ben Bagley's George Gershwin Revisited album on MGM.

He was also the original idea to play Bobby in Sondheim's Company (he didn't, though the two continued to be friends and later wrote a screenplay together).

16 minutes ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

I think Rita Moreno said it best: "Tony is a workhorse role. No one is going to love you for it."

I somehow hadn't seen that quote before, but it's the plain truth. As I said above, I don't think there's ever been a production where the Tony was acclaimed for his portrayal. 

[Silver Raven]

Warren Beatty was only 23/24 when West Side Story was filmed.  And his career had just gotten started with Splendor in the Grass and The Roman Spring of Mrs. Stone.  Not likely he would have been cast.

[Padma]

I blame Colonel Parker for all the things that bother me about Elvis Presley's career, musically and in films. Now I'm adding "West Side Story" to the list, because it would have been a great part for him and I think he could have been excellent as Tony.

However, per Wikipedia: "Elvis Presley was approached for Tony, but his manager, Colonel Tom Parker, strongly believed the role to be wrong for Elvis and made him decline in favor of other movie musicals.[3] According to legend, the Colonel didn't want Elvis associated with gang warfare and knife crime, although three years earlier, Elvis' character Danny Fisher stabbed and killed the small-time gangster 'Shark' played by Vic Morrow in the movie King Creole. When the movie became a hit and earned 10 Oscars, Elvis regretted having given up the part."

As a Bobby Darin fan, I would have liked to see what he could have done with it. Anthony Perkins never seemed to have enough swag (like Beymer).  Still a great film musical, but ... oh, for different casting on Tony.

[LauraAnders]

1 hour ago, Padma said:

I blame Colonel Parker for all the things that bother me about Elvis Presley's career, musically and in films. Now I'm adding "West Side Story" to the list, because it would have been a great part for him and I think he could have been excellent as Tony.

However, per Wikipedia: "Elvis Presley was approached for Tony, but his manager, Colonel Tom Parker, strongly believed the role to be wrong for Elvis and made him decline in favor of other movie musicals.[3] According to legend, the Colonel didn't want Elvis associated with gang warfare and knife crime, although three years earlier, Elvis' character Danny Fisher stabbed and killed the small-time gangster 'Shark' played by Vic Morrow in the movie King Creole. When the movie became a hit and earned 10 Oscars, Elvis regretted having given up the part."

As a Bobby Darin fan, I would have liked to see what he could have done with it. Anthony Perkins never seemed to have enough swag (like Beymer).  Still a great film musical, but ... oh, for different casting on Tony.

I have to agree. I wasn't there, but it seems to me that Colonel Parker thought he knew best when it came to Elvis and he figured he would milk the deluxe cash cow that Elvis created and in that way, Elvis would be able to walk away with a huge amount of money and a very comfortable life. So many other artists failed to get what they deserved out of their work and talent. So, in one aspect, Parker was correct.

But I believe Elvis was tormented by the terrible movies that Parker had him make. He was never given the opportunity to stretch and use his talent to its ultimate potential. I think that was one of the biggest factors that made Elvis so unhappy. Just compare the way Elvis' career developed with other artists.

But, on the other hand, Col Parker did a good job of protecting Elvis from getting cheated and ensuring he would at least get what he deserved. Just compare Elvis with artists like Harry Nilsson or Leonard Cohen. Both of them had business managers who embezzled all their money and left them penniless when they were near the end of their careers. Leonard Cohen started touring and earned a large amount of money before he died. So his story was not a complete tragedy. Unfortunately, Harry Nilsson suffered a massive heart attack and died at an early age (around 50).  Can't know for sure. But having all his money embezzled could not have done his health any good.

Edited March 3, 2017 by LauraAnders

[Padma]

39 minutes ago, LauraAnders said:

I have to agree. I wasn't there, but it seems to me that Colonel Parker thought he knew best when it came to Elvis and he figured he would milk the deluxe cash cow that Elvis created and in that way, Elvis would be able to walk away with a huge amount of money and a very comfortable life. So many other artists failed to get what they deserved out of their work and talent. So, in one aspect, Parker was correct.

But I believe Elvis was tormented by the terrible movies that Parker had him make. He was never given the opportunity to stretch and use his talent to its ultimate potential. I think that was one of the biggest factors that made Elvis so unhappy. Just compare the way Elvis' career developed with other artists.

But, on the other hand, Col Parker did a good job of protecting Elvis from getting cheated and ensuring he would at least get what he deserved. Just compare Elvis with artists like Harry Nilsson or Leonard Cohen. Both of them had business managers who embezzled all their money and left them penniless when they were near the end of their careers. Leonard Cohen started touring and earned a large amount of money before he died. So his story was not a complete tragedy. Unfortunately, Harry Nilsson suffered a massive heart attack and died at an early age (around 50).  Can't know for sure. But having all his money embezzled could not have done his health any good.

Well, begrudgingly..very!...I have to admit you have a point. There are so many artists who were bilked by their managers and wound up with nothing. Parker took 25% (instead of 10-15%) when he took over managing Elvis and toward the end was taking 50%, but he still was a very good promoter and really didn't steal all of his money (which, given Presley's disinterest in the business details would have been very, very easy to do, like the sad examples you mention and so many other artists we know who wound up with nothing after years of performing, cheated by managers,  agents, producers or even spouses.)

I do kind of admire Parker as an immigrant who came to the U.S. with nothing, shilled in carnivals during the Depression, had an eye for musical talent and was an effective promoter for several stars before meeting Elvis.  He was, apparently, a talented salesman of his musical product but he just didn't care at all about art--not of music or of acting.  Which is sad, because Elvis did and had so much talent for both that didn't get utilized because Parker was just looking at the money.

There's still a lot to enjoy from his career, and I guess Parker has to get some credit for that, too. But its just sad to think of the potential that was lost--in music and in film--just because of "the bottom line" for the manager, not for Presley, being all about the money.  But, yes, it would have been even sadder if after a decade of knocking himself out to meet many of Parker's commercial ambitions for him, his manager et al took all the money and he was left destitute. I guess that's the "bright side" of Colonel Tom Parker's management.

[LauraAnders]

Padma,

There is a film you may enjoy. In part, it discusses the relationship between Elvis and Col. Parker. It is a film titled "His Way" (2011). It is a biography of Jerry Weintraub who did several deals with Elvis and Col. Parker as well as Sinatra and many other famous people in Hollywood show business.

I enjoyed this film very much and the part of it that deals with Elvis and Parker was especially entertaining. If you ever get a chance to see this film, I hope you will take it and that you will enjoy it.

[LauraAnders]

I just finished watching Detour and I'm now even more certain that I didn't like this movie.

The main reason was that it was just so extremely unbelievable. A man is making a long trip from one end of the country to the other and he sees a girl hitchhiking. He's feeling lonely and decides to offer her a ride so he'll have someone to talk with.

But this girl had been in the car before. She was given a ride just a few hours (or maybe a day or two) before by the previous owner of the car. She knows enough about this man that she can have him put into jail for murder.

What are the odds that you will pick up a hitchhiker along a major highway and it will turn out this person will recognize your car and know the story of what happened to you and this car? At least one in a million or more.

Then, this woman starts to "push around" the man. She talks tough to him. She threatens him. She orders him around. She talks meaner to him than any female I've ever seen before talks to a man. It was completely unbelievable. Completely unrealistic. So bizarre that I just couldn't stand it.

There was not even any redeeming aspect to this story. They could have inserted a pot of gold (figuratively speaking) and arranged that these two people would learn a good lesson about  morality and forgive each other and fall in love or something. But no! Nothing. Just a nasty story where this woman acts like a total b-word the entire time she is on screen.

Well, I'm 100% certain that I hated this movie.

But, I can understand that other people might enjoy it. I can't understand why they might enjoy it. But people always can have differing opinions and they are certainly entitled to their own opinions.

[GreekGeek]

23 hours ago, Milburn Stone said:

I could see that, and I actually think I could also see Anthony Perkins. It's been a long long time since I've seen Fear Strikes Out, but I kind of remember he was a convincing lower-middle-class troubled youth in that, and I can imagine the actor making the transition to convincing lower-middle-class troubled street youth. Of all names mentioned, I think Perkins would be my pick. He also could sing, and might have been up to the musical challenges of the role.

Re Perkins singing--that's interesting about his connection with Sondheim. There's a movie called Evening Primrose with lyrics by Sondheim. Here is a clip of Perkins singing the opening number. He's a reclusive poet who makes a home for himself in a department store after hours. Of course this character and even Jim Pearsall in Fear Strikes Out were very different from Tony. I never knew Elvis was even considered. I always thought he was too much of a good ol' boy to be a convincing New York youth, but we'll never know. Of the singers and actors Rinaldo listed above, the one I would have most liked to see was Darin.

[Padma]

20 hours ago, LauraAnders said:

Padma,

There is a film you may enjoy. In part, it discusses the relationship between Elvis and Col. Parker. It is a film titled "His Way" (2011). It is a biography of Jerry Weintraub who did several deals with Elvis and Col. Parker as well as Sinatra and many other famous people in Hollywood show business.

I enjoyed this film very much and the part of it that deals with Elvis and Parker was especially entertaining. If you ever get a chance to see this film, I hope you will take it and that you will enjoy it.

Weintraub was quite a character and that documentary sounds very entertaining.  I'll keep an eye out for it (including on Prime free views). I'd never heard of it before--Thanks for the recommendation!

[ratgirlagogo]

5 hours ago, LauraAnders said:

  There was not even any redeeming aspect to this story. They could have inserted a pot of gold (figuratively speaking) and arranged that these two people would learn a good lesson about  morality and forgive each other and fall in love or something. But no! Nothing. Just a nasty story where this woman acts like a total b-word the entire time she is on screen.

Well, I'm 100% certain that I hated this movie.

It's good to know what you like and dislike, for sure. :)  You might want to avoid noir as a genre if plots like this bother you.  As for the surreal, unrealistic aspects of the plot - I believe that the main character Al is a prototypical Unreliable Narrator. Not everyone agrees with me on that but to quote a guy who saw way more movies than I ever will, Roger Ebert:

Quote

 

The difference between a crime film and a noir film is that the bad guys in crime movies know they're bad and want to be, while a noir hero thinks he's a good guy who has been ambushed by life. Al Roberts complains to us: “Whichever way you turn, fate sticks out a foot to trip you.” Most noir heroes are defeated through their weaknesses. Few have been weaker than Roberts. He narrates the movie by speaking directly to the audience, mostly in a self-pitying whine. He's pleading his case, complaining that life hasn't given him a fair break.

Most critics of “Detour” have taken Al's story at face value: He was unlucky in love, he lost the good girl and was savaged by the bad girl, he was an innocent bystander who looked guilty even to himself. But the critic Andrew Britton argues a more intriguing theory in Ian Cameron's Book of Film Noir. He emphasizes that the narration is addressed directly to us: We're not hearing what happened, but what Al Roberts wants us to believe happened. It's a “spurious but flattering account,” he writes, pointing out that Sue the singer hardly fits Al's description of her, that Al is less in love than in need of her paycheck, and that his cover-up of Haskell's death is a rationalization for an easy theft. For Britton, Al's version illustrates Freud's theory that traumatic experiences can be reworked into fantasies that are easier to live with.

Link to the entire review:http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-detour-1945.  You don't have to like the movie to find the review interesting, at least.

If any of you who are interested in Elvis have not read Peter Guralnick's beautiful, loving two volume biography of him, you should.  Volume one covers his life up unto the death of his mother Gladys, and volume two covers the rest of his life. This division is because one of Guralnick's conclusions was that Elvis was kind of adrift on many levels after the death of his mother -  she seems to have been his closest friend in the world and losing her left him quite alone, emotionally - the heavy drug use begins at this point for one thing.  There is a lot of discussion of  his movies, how they were made, how the projects were chosen.  I don't have it in front of me but the line I always remember was I believe from Scotty Moore, who explained why Elvis was willing to go on the Steve Allen show and sing Hound Dog to an actual hound dog by saying something like - he never , ever wanted to be impolite to anyone and he always did the best with whatever material he was given.  While I think this really did make him a lovely person this approach is suicide for any serious artist and it's tragic for someone with his huge natural talents.

https://www.amazon.com/Last-Train-Memphis-Elvis-Presley/dp/0316332259/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1488658370&sr=1-1

https://www.amazon.com/Careless-Love-Unmaking-Elvis-Presley/dp/0316332976/ref=pd_bxgy_14_2?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=0316332976&pd_rd_r=GQ8VGE2VEEHX3JYY5A39&pd_

Edited March 4, 2017 by ratgirlagogo

[Rinaldo]

Thanks for those great links, @ratgirlagogo.

For those interested in reading more about Elvis as an actor, I recommend Sheila O'Malley's blog. (You can find links to past posts by topic down the right side.) A sometime actress (the actors Kerry and Mike O'Malley are her cousins), she has interesting thoughts about things acting- and film-related. She seems especially interested in taking a close look at the work of people commonly underrated as actors, like Elvis Presley and John Wayne. She also wrote eloquently about Detour, and Ann Savage in it -- the first time I ever heard of either, in fact, was when I read her blog.

Edited March 5, 2017 by Rinaldo

[LauraAnders]

RatGirl,

Great post. I appreciated the info and your great attitude too.

[prican58]

Currently reading Last Train to Memphis and it's a great read. Been reading it for almost a year because I don't get to read too often so I read when I can. 

It's not really classic movie territory but if anyone interested in Elvis and that era of music PBS is airing tonight the American Masters doc about Patsy Cline. I won't discuss it here but I figure many regulars on this board would enjoy it. 

[Badger]

I know quite a few people who never forgave Steve Allen for that hound dog stunt.  Funnily enough, not all of them were even Elvis fans.  They just found it disrespectful.

Changing topics, this will mean absolutely nothing to anyone under 50, but I was checking the TCM schedule and next Monday night, they're going to be showing "Hand in Hand" which is a British film about the friendship between two children, a Jewish girl and a Christian boy.  Back when I was a kid, there was a show where they had different child-themed films from different countries and that was one of them.  Anyway, if you remember that film, you might to check it out again.  

[prican58]

Badger, I believe that was CBS Children's Film Festival. I loved that program.

http://kukla.tv/cbs.html

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053889/?ref_=nv_sr_2

[ebk57]

1 hour ago, Badger said:

Changing topics, this will mean absolutely nothing to anyone under 50, but I was checking the TCM schedule and next Monday night, they're going to be showing "Hand in Hand" which is a British film about the friendship between two children, a Jewish girl and a Christian boy.  Back when I was a kid, there was a show where they had different child-themed films from different countries and that was one of them.  Anyway, if you remember that film, you might to check it out again.

I just got a chill reading this.  I haven't seen this movie since ...  I don't remember when, but it was some Saturday afternoon program.  For a while, I thought I dreamed it, but finally looked into it a few years ago and saw that it does exist.  And now, I'm a little nervous to see it again after so long.  It made a profound impact on me as a child.  Thanks for the heads up - I'll definitely be recording it.

And after all these years lurking in this thread (here and on TWoP), this is the movie that has made me post.  And I still have nothing insightful to say, but I had to say something.  Thank you all for your thoughtful posts about movies that I love.

Edited March 5, 2017 by ebk57

[Badger]

You're welcome.  I also remember being very affected by it when I saw it.  You can find bits and pieces on YouTube, but not the whole movie.

[Crisopera]

Listening to the "Attaboy, Clarence" podcast, the question arose, "If you could recast any movie, how would you do it?"  From one role to the entire movie, how would you recast any movie?  (The role of Tony in West Side Story was discussed above.)  For me, it would be the role of Katie in The Hard Way (1943), the younger sister.  Although Joan Leslie is okay (I used to think she was awful in the role, but I watched it recently, and I found her decent, if uninspired), the role really needs a powerhouse to go toe-to-toe with Ida Lupino, and be convincing as an overnight Broadway star.  Ideally, it would have been Judy Garland.  How fabulous would that have been?  On a lesser star level, Ann Blyth would also have been excellent - she was so memorable as Veda in Mildred Pierce (1945), and she could sing.  So, fellow moviephiles, how would you recast movies?  Disregard whatever studios the stars were affiliated at the time the movies were made.

Edited March 6, 2017 by Crisopera

[LilWharveyGal]

I absolutely adore The Best Years of Our Lives but I've always wished I could magically re-cast the cast member who, to me, is a glaringly weak link - Cathy O'Donnell as Wilma.  Admittedly, she was in a tough spot as the sweet, steadfast girl-next-door when the other two "girls" in the film were the more independent and dynamic Teresa Wright and Virginia Mayo, but...boy, what a drip.  I'm not sure who would have been a good replacement, though.

[Milburn Stone]

36 minutes ago, Crisopera said:

So, fellow moviephiles, how would you recast movies?

This is going to be sacrilege, or heresy, but I would have loved to see Cary Grant take over Henry Higgins in My Fair Lady. Do I think he would have been better than Rex? I can't say that. But I can say I don't think Jack Warner was crazy to seek him out. I think he could have been hilarious! And moving. The only fly in the ointment is that Grant's own English accent is slightly "downmarket" and that would have flown in the face of the whole concept. Details, details.

[Wiendish Fitch]

I would have cast Eric Blore as Pop in Swing Time instead of the revoltingly unfunny and charmless Victor Moore, but, alas, he was cast as the prissy dance studio manager instead. Darn.

25 minutes ago, LilWharveyGal said:

I absolutely adore The Best Years of Our Lives but I've always wished I could magically re-cast the cast member who, to me, is a glaringly weak link - Cathy O'Donnell as Wilma.  Admittedly, she was in a tough spot as the sweet, steadfast girl-next-door when the other two "girls" in the film were the more independent and dynamic Teresa Wright and Virginia Mayo, but...boy, what a drip.  I'm not sure who would have been a good replacement, though.

Oh, I dunno. It's weird, Cathy O'Donnell was by no means the greatest actress (I'm not saying she was bad by any means), but she has this endearing vulnerability that makes me care about her (it's hard not to want to hug her characters in Detective Story and Ben-Hur). Yeah, Wilma isn't as interesting as the principle actresses (though, to be fair, I never got what was so great about Virginia Mayo, either), but she really isn't supposed to be, so I'm okay with her performance.