1939's Of Mice and Men

Post Reply
User avatar
ken123
Posts: 1797
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 4:08 pm
Location: Chicago

1939's Of Mice and Men

Post by ken123 »

Contains Lon Chaney Jr's finest screen performance. Burgess Meredith, Charles Bickford, Bob Steele,Roman Bohnen, and Leigh Whipper in top form, Betty Field was so - so.One of Lewis Mileston'e best dirctorial efforts, from a Steinbeck novel, an unforgettable Aaron Copland score. :wink:
Last edited by ken123 on July 4th, 2010, 10:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
jdb1

Post by jdb1 »

Abolutely agree, Ken.

There was talk in the Old City about the more recent version with Sinise and Malkovich. Sorry, I don't think there's any comparison, but that may be colored by the fact that I think Malkovich is an abomination masquerading as an "actor."

The performances in the earlier version are sublime. Chaney is heartbreaking -- it's the performance of a lifetime, and Meredith is wonderful as the guy trying to stick by his one and only, but very burdensome friend. The gritty, populist style of the film fits the story perfectly. This story doesn't really do it for me in anything but black and white.
User avatar
mongoII
Posts: 12340
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 7:37 pm
Location: Florida

Post by mongoII »

If ever there was a performance that deserved an Oscar nomination it was Long Chaney Jr. as Lenny. A terrible oversight by the Academy.
So what else is new?
jdb1

Post by jdb1 »

OMAM was shown last Saturday night on the CUNY cable station (that's the City University of New York). I caught only the first 15 minutes or so, but I was amazed at the good condition of the print (most movies shown on CUNY-TV are in deplorable condition). The principals grabbed you and drew you in right from their very first lines. Chaney is wonderful, but Meredith is quite charismatic as well. Any of the younger generation who know him only as the Penguin on Batman re-runs would be quite impressed with him, I think.
User avatar
vallo
Posts: 278
Joined: April 15th, 2007, 8:39 am
Location: Long Island, N.Y.

Post by vallo »

I agree MongoII. Between this film and 1940's "The Wolf-Man" He really lived up to the Chaney legacy.
No matter how many times they remake "Of Mice and Men". The original is still the best.
"We're all forgotten sooner or later. But not films. That's all the memorial we should need or hope for."
-Burt Lancaster
User avatar
ken123
Posts: 1797
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 4:08 pm
Location: Chicago

Re:

Post by ken123 »

jdb1 wrote:Abolutely agree, Ken.

There was talk in the Old City about the more recent version with Sinise and Malkovich. Sorry, I don't think there's any comparison, but that may be colored by the fact that I think Malkovich is an abomination masquerading as an "actor."

The performances in the earlier version are sublime. Chaney is heartbreaking -- it's the performance of a lifetime, and Meredith is wonderful as the guy trying to stick by his one and only, but very burdensome friend. The gritty, populist style of the film fits the story perfectly. This story doesn't really do it for me in anything but black and white.
Judith,
Please don't hold back your opinions. I especially like your comments concerning Mr. Malkovich. :D
User avatar
JackFavell
Posts: 11926
Joined: April 20th, 2009, 9:56 am

Re: 1939's Of Mice and Men

Post by JackFavell »

I quite agree with jdb about the new version. I had a very hard time with it and I still don't understand why they felt the need to change things in it, even if it was ever so slightly.

Of course, my feelings are colored by the fact that I co-directed the play - we opened about two weeks before the new film came out. To me, it was shocking, the liberties they took with the almost perfect original script. Such is Hollywood today. Fix it till it's awful.
User avatar
ken123
Posts: 1797
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 4:08 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: 1939's Of Mice and Men

Post by ken123 »

JackFavell wrote:I quite agree with jdb about the new version. I had a very hard time with it and I still don't understand why they felt the need to change things in it, even if it was ever so slightly.

Of course, my feelings are colored by the fact that I co-directed the play - we opened about two weeks before the new film came out. To me, it was shocking, the liberties they took with the almost perfect original script. Such is Hollywood today. Fix it till it's awful.
Jack Favell you bad girl. By that I mean that you hit the nail on the head. 8)
RedRiver
Posts: 4200
Joined: July 28th, 2011, 9:42 am

Re: 1939's Of Mice and Men

Post by RedRiver »

Love this movie. Love this book. Chaney is not my favorite actor. But he's so good in this it's remarkable. (In fact, I seem to be remarking on it!) Everybody is good in it. At least good enough to serve the story and not be a distraction.

I recently watched the movie after not seeing it for many years. Ok. Maybe, MAYBE there's an awkward air about it. As if the director didn't always get exactly what he was going for. Some moments are overstated. But with a story like this, you can't wrong. An able team need only respect the material and make an honest effort. This company did just that and it paid handsomely.

I kind of wanted Meredith to say, "Try and stop me, Batman! WAH! WAH! WAH!" But you can't have everything.
Last edited by RedRiver on July 31st, 2011, 2:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Gary J.
Posts: 199
Joined: November 9th, 2008, 1:22 pm
Location: Sonoma, CA
Contact:

Re: 1939's Of Mice and Men

Post by Gary J. »

ken123 wrote:Contains Lon Chaney Jr's finest screen performance.
I always assumed that his finest performance was considered to be in MY FAVORITE BRUNETTE (47), where he plays a simple-minded half-wit who doesn't know his own strength and keeps crushing Bob Hope....
User avatar
charliechaplinfan
Posts: 9040
Joined: January 15th, 2008, 9:49 am

Re: 1939's Of Mice and Men

Post by charliechaplinfan »

I saw the more recent film of Of Mice and Men after reading the book many years ago, I cried my heart out, it's so sad. I did find the Sinise version more heartrending than the book, I felt perhaps it pushed too hard for the tears. Great book, not sure I could stand another screen version but I'm kind of curious after what has been said here.
Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself - Charlie Chaplin
Post Reply