Author Topic: 1945 Retrospots: Discovery Project  (Read 22339 times)

DarkeningHumour

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10453
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: 1945 Retrospots: Discovery Project
« Reply #110 on: February 23, 2017, 04:05:24 PM »
No nominations? The movie must be terrible... ;)
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

Sandy

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 12075
  • "The life we build, we never stop creating.”
    • Sandy's Cinematic Musings
Re: 1945 Retrospots: Discovery Project
« Reply #111 on: February 23, 2017, 06:34:06 PM »

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 36128
  • Marathon Man
Re: 1945 Retrospots: Discovery Project
« Reply #112 on: February 23, 2017, 09:29:33 PM »

Confidential Agent

Charles Boyer couldn't sound less like a native of Spain. The only actor with a more pronounced French accent is Maurice Chevalier. Then again, Lauren Bacall is supposed to be British and Peter Lorre is also playing a Spaniard. Overall the film's refusal to use ethnic make-up or accents is a plus, especially compared to American Wanda Hendrix playing British lower class and underage. (Not with those curves.)

Based on a novel by Graham Greene, this is a different kind of spy thriller. Boyer is an average citizen on a vital mission because his side doesn't have any real spies to send out. I've never seen Boyer so vulnerable, and he's excellent at it. His character is in way over his head and watching him struggle to outwit the enemy (and often fail) is a refreshing approach, if not an interesting one. Too often, he lucks out of a situation, somehow continuing to succeed as he fails because the film would be over if he didn't.

Lauren Bacall is well-cast as Boyer's one possible friend, so hard boiled she often comes off as his toughest opponent. Bacall made this between To Have and Have Not and The Big Sleep and it's very obvious how inexperienced she is. Many scenes she doesn't glide between emotions so much as nail down one and then immediately slam the other. As I always expect, the shining star among the cast is Peter Lorre, who could be worth nominating just for this one scene. If you know enough Lorre than you know pleading for mercy is what he does best, so this doesn't really stretch his skills, but in these moments he was legendary.
Rating: * *, #69 out of 76 for 1945

Possible Nominations: Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Supporting Actor - Peter Lorre
Chances that somebody else will watch this: 15%, but I'm really glad to have found that Lorre clip because I'm 90% confident a few people will click it.

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 19044
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: 1945 Retrospots: Discovery Project
« Reply #113 on: February 23, 2017, 10:35:47 PM »
Great Lorre scene.  But Boyle was... less than good.
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 19044
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: 1945 Retrospots: Discovery Project
« Reply #114 on: February 26, 2017, 07:10:47 PM »
Children of Paradise/Les Enfants du Paradis

It is the 1820s. "Paradise", in this case, is the abode of the gods, and the gods are the audience of the theatres of the Boulevard of Crime (so called because adultery and murder happen in the theatres ever night).  Thus, the "children" are the actors, writers and producers of the stage who cater to these "gods", their whole lives revolving around the pleasure of the audience.

The central figure is Garance, a woman of such remarkable beauty that four men request, demand and battle for her hand, as well as her evening companionship.  She, on the other hand, smiles at them all, remains distant, and wanders where her interest takes her.  She never participates in crime, although observes many crimes.  She does not dance or sing or act, so she is only ever window dressing for the various theatres, never wanting a speaking role.  Three of the four men are up-and-coming central figures of the Boulevard, Baptiste, the gentle pantomime, Frederick the Shakespearean actor, and Lacenaire the boastful criminal.  Garance would like to dance like a butterfly between the three men, but a powerful fourth man appears, a proud nobleman who changes their whole world.

There are three sets of stories: that of the multiple-party romance, the highs and lows of the theatres and the stories on the stage, all reflecting what is happening in the actors' lives.  While there is a light touch on all of these deep real-life events, I prefer the stage productions, both silent and spoken, that portray both entertainment and serious themes. 

This film is spoken of by some as the greatest French film, and it's epic scale, intermission and grand credit sequences indicate that it wants to be seen as an important film.  I am sure it is important.  It has it's significant place in the history of cinema.  But as a whole, I am not sure I want to give it too much credit.  It is good, the characters are well-drawn and it uses it's length of time well, but I do not know how much I will consider this film in the future.  It has to do with show business and with romance, and the presentation of both are far removed from my own experience, nor does it teach me much about the context.  The acting is an older style, almost vaudevillian, that keeps me distant from the characters, even as I am somewhat involved in their stories.

There are a number of things that I can admire about this film.  It was created and filmed in a Paris occupied by the Nazis. It presents it's worlds distinctly, each having their own manner of speaking and focus and running gags. And it also shows how there are pathways from the world of the stage to the world of the personal lives to the world of the theatre and back.

Yes, it's three hours.  But it is certainly a significant watch, and a generally enjoyable one. 

3.5/5

"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

Knocked Out Loaded

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1914
  • I might remember it all differently tomorrow.
Re: 1945 Retrospots: Discovery Project
« Reply #115 on: February 28, 2017, 05:24:10 AM »
House Of Dracula (Erle C. Kenton).

Not a single scene here is set at Dracula's house. Instead we visit Dr. Edlemann's, where Dracula's coffin is in the cellar and where Dracula himself has agreed to undergo some sort of rehabilitation program. Later on the Wolfman drops by to get rehab from Dr. Edlemann as well. And a little later still, the doctor also stumbles over Frankenstein's monster. The more the merrier? Someone must have smoked something very unsuitable while this was conceived.

10°
Extraordinary (81-100˚) | Very good (61-80˚) | Good (41-60˚) | Fair (21-40˚) | Poor (0-20˚)

DarkeningHumour

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10453
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: 1945 Retrospots: Discovery Project
« Reply #116 on: February 28, 2017, 07:41:00 AM »
I cannot tell whether this is a comedy or horror.
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

Knocked Out Loaded

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1914
  • I might remember it all differently tomorrow.
Re: 1945 Retrospots: Discovery Project
« Reply #117 on: February 28, 2017, 09:57:36 AM »
It is horrific comic!
Extraordinary (81-100˚) | Very good (61-80˚) | Good (41-60˚) | Fair (21-40˚) | Poor (0-20˚)

Jared

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3492
Re: 1945 Retrospots: Discovery Project
« Reply #118 on: March 02, 2017, 01:53:47 PM »
The Wicked Lady

Kind of a fun film noir mixed with costume drama....Margaret Lockwood plays the wicked lady, basically ruining everyone's life with all her evil scheming. What I really kind of enjoyed about this though was that it isn't just some manipulative femme fatale making a bunch of dummies that are in love with her bend to her will. It has that, but she also gets her hands really dirty herself. Lockwood gets to be involved in the action.

Most of the supporting characters are kind of blah, but James Mason gives a hammy and fun performance as a bad guy Zorro-like bandit.

DarkeningHumour

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10453
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: 1945 Retrospots: Discovery Project
« Reply #119 on: March 04, 2017, 06:30:48 AM »
The Picture of Dorian Gray
Albert Lewin (1945)


« ...and God help you if you use voice-over in your work, my friends. God help you. That's flaccid, sloppy writing. Any idiot can write a voice-over narration to explain the thoughts of a character. »

I know Adaptation was released in 2002, putting it out of the reach of Albert Lewin as he, at his typewriter, with no malice and even less thought, glancing at an open edition of Wilde's novel, shock-full of annotations, all of them wrong, pressed those little black keys to form the word "narrator", impressed at his own intelligence for figuring out however a movie might convey a character's thoughts. He still should have seen it, somehow, by means of time travel and miscellaneous sorcery, or at the very least, been made aware of the contents of that masterclass.

The stupidity of the script of The Picture of Dorian Gray is baffling. It is as if it had been written at the dawn of cinema, before anyone understood how a crafty close-up, a clever insert or a well timed camera movement. It is as if the script had been meant for the radio and someone forgot to adapt it. There were actual scenes where I told myself, as the camera fixed on Gray's ominous gaze, « Oh, Dorian is conflicted right now. » just a couple of seconds before the narrator told me that, indeed, « At that moment Dorian Gray became conflicted. ».

To the incompetence of the writing you have to add the fact that it does not understand the story it tells. Either that or it has chosen to tell a different, worse story than that of the novel, which is improbable because it quotes some dialogue verbatim and otherwise makes great efforts to be closely faithful to its original material. Lewin did not understand the importance of key elements of the story and in fact I wonder if he was not working from his nine year-old son's school notes.

There are a couple of redeeming features to the film that do not begin to redeem it. George Sander's performance is the best thing in the film, even though he is playing at half his All About Eve powers. Most of his lines are word for word Wilde, as badly chosen as they are; Lord Henry is a hard character to bungle. There are also a few great shots here and there, notably at some key moments in the plot, that use shadows and composition to rise to the levels of what the movie should have been.

4/10

Possible nomination: Best Cinematography, Best Supporting Actor: George Sanders

Can we nominate movies for Worst Screenplay awards?
« Last Edit: March 04, 2017, 06:35:12 AM by DarkeningHumour »
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/