WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

[JackFavell]

It is, mainly because I like a challenge. Seeing these films is quite difficult, or it was when I started. It's really getting great for silent fans even in the last 6 months, with youtube opening up a bit and Netflix investing in silents.

The hard part is, I'd like to see silents from all the decades that they were making them, but the ones most readily available are from the 5 last years of silent film. Many silent fans stay in that period alone, and are very picky about their films, because it was the height of moviemaking for them. Many people think that sound films never came back to the brilliance of those last 5 years in the silent era, and sometimes I agree, depending on my mood.

My problem is that I simply don't have the money to buy every film, so it means there are huge gaps in my watching. And silent films simply didn't turn up, you couldn't watch them unless you bought them. Silent film fans are really tough, amd very knowledgeable, because they've had to work to find their movie preferences. I am still like a newbie in watching, though I've heard of and read about so many stars and films. Name me a silent star and more than likely I'll know what 'type' they are, what they look like, and can maybe even mention what films they starred in. But have I seen them in a moving picture? Probably not.

[CineMaven]

You make a good point there about knowing the faces and names of stars you've never seen in action. Even more astounding than seeing film stars whose voices we've never heard ( Valentino etc... ) is to know there's a wide wide swath of film stars that really won't be remembered because they've never even been seen. I guess silent film fans are a dedicated bunch; their unearthing of films is tantamount to an archaeological...sociological expedition worthy of finding King Tut. Imagine, more folks know Pia Zadora and barely know the beauty and popularity of a Corinne Griffith. Tsk! Tsk! The sands of time.

...Name me a silent star and more than likely I'll know what 'type' they are, what they look like, and can maybe even mention what films they starred in. But have I seen them in a moving picture? Probably not.

Huh? You do? Hey...



http://silverscreenoasis.com/oasis3/vie ... 86#p123586

[MikeBSG]

Last night I saw "The Perks of Being a Wallflower" (2012) directed by Stephen Chbosky.

It was okay. Basically, I saw the movie because of Emma Watson, who played Hermione in the "Harry Potter" movies. She was very convincing as an American, and her scenes in the movie were very good.

However, to me, the movie was as realistic as "Harry Potter." The movie (about high school students in the early 90s) has a freshman who quickly becomes friends with a group of seniors. The rationale for this is that they are all "misfits" in the high school. He even dates a senior girl. I went to high school in the late 70s, and this would not happen. The movie was well done, the movie entertained me, but, for me, it had as much relationship with high school as "The Gay Divorcee" (to pick an example) had with the Great Depression.

[JackFavell]

I didn't know they even made a movie of this, my daughter just read the book.

[RedRiver]

I've watched it. The quality is iffy

Maven O'Cinema!

This is something I've been thinking about. You know me. Still carving stick figures into rocks! If I had one of those computer things, I could watch You Tube and Hulu. But what about the quality? Is it often poor, annoying to look at? Does it depend on the source? Are there lots of films available? Or is the selection limited? Finally, what exactly is "running water"?

Yours Prehistorically,
Og

[charliechaplinfan]

I came to message boards because of silent movies because there was a derth of information about them and they're never shown on TV. They are the most expensive films to buy, so it's a drip, drip, drip kind of education. Of all the movies there is more romanticism about them too. Is it because we never heard a lot of the stars speak? Or we don't know as much about them? there's so many lost, unavailable but in the last five years or so more and more have come to market and we can explore more than the big names like Pickford, Valentino, Fairbanks. I love silents, chat away, I'll pipe up.

Never seen the attraction of Ricardo Cortez though and Antonio Moreno is completely beyond me. Home grown Americans could masquerade as Latins just for the mystic. That went out of the window with sound.

[JackFavell]

Then there's Rod La Rocque...

The quality of most silents is iffy, just because they weren't restored or cared for and dang it, they are old! But for me it's still worth it to see them, even if it's on youtube. There are literally tons of movies on youtube. But alas, sometimes they are in bad condition... sometimes they are pristine copies.

One of the worst cases has nothing to do with youtube itself, it's simply in bad condition as a film, and there are no good copies available. It is my favorite silent movie, A KISS FOR CINDERELLA, which is badly deteriorating, and no help for it in sight. Most people have never even heard of it and no one wants to restore it. I fear that in another couple of years it will be dust.

[CineMaven]

...Never seen the attraction of Ricardo Cortez though and Antonio Moreno is completely beyond me. Home grown Americans could masquerade as Latins just for the mystic. That went out of the window with sound.

HUH?



It's all so subjective isn't it? I guess all the studios had to have their "Latin Lover" type. There was only one Valentino. Swarthy skinned, slicked-back Brylcremed hair, sharp aquiline features. I like Cortez 'cuz he's dangerous, flirty, sexy and will kill you if you get in his way. ( Have you ever seen him in Karloff's "The Walking Dead"? ) Ricardo Cortez... (( sigh!! )) just your nice average Jewish boy from NYC.

[JackFavell]

I'm with Maven, though he's not always the best actor, I love Cortez, especially when he's sure of himself. He's got something that I go for in a big way. He's gorgeous in that Latin Lover way, but then he's got this very New Yawk way of talking. I like him smooth, I like him tough, I guess I just like him. He looks sharp as a needle. He's got a brain. I know he's in a couple of really lousy movies, but I don't care. When he's good, he's good. And when he's bad, he's better.

[CineMaven]

Haaaa...and I second what Mae West Favell said above.

[charliechaplinfan]

No, I don't get him, I've seen a few films with him in but I've never seen it. On the other hand I do see the 'it' what John Gilbert, Ramon Novarro and Valentino had. I think Buster Keaton had oodles of 'it' too and Chaplin. Oh, and Doug Fairbanks too. It's funny Ricardo is quite alike in looks to Valentino and George Raft both of whom I like.

No movie watching for me, 2 kids off school ill. I'm being driven to housework by constant daytime TV.

[Ann Harding]

...Never seen the attraction of Ricardo Cortez though and Antonio Moreno is completely beyond me. Home grown Americans could masquerade as Latins just for the mystic. That went out of the window with sound.

HUH?



It's all so subjective isn't it? I guess all the studios had to have their "Latin Lover" type. There was only one Valentino. Swarthy skinned, slicked-back Brylcremed hair, sharp aquiline features. I like Cortez 'cuz he's dangerous, flirty, sexy and will kill you if you get in his way. ( Have you ever seen him in Karloff's "The Walking Dead"? ) Ricardo Cortez... (( sigh!! )) just your nice average Jewish boy from NYC.

Funny, like CCfan, I am so keen on Cortez. I got some interesting informations about him from Alma Rubens' memoirs (a very startling account of her short and troubled life. Not for the fainthearted). They got married and he never told her about his background. She genuinely thought he was Mexican, until one day in a Mexican restaurant, when she urged him to speak Spanish to the waiter. He turned nasty and snapped at her. Their marriage was very short. I find Cortez the best when he plays nasties like in The Younger Generation (1929, F. Capra) where he plays a rich lawyer who behaves abominably towards his poor Jewish parents calling them 'servants' in front of his rich friends.

[JackFavell]

I think the problem is the disconnect between his latin looks and his true personality. I don't quite buy the latin lover stereotype in the first place with him, so it doesn't bother me when he's different, cool and evil or jovial and smartmouthed. I just find him attractive in a very New York kind of way.

[CineMaven]

Funny, like CCfan, I am so keen on Cortez. I got some interesting informations about him from Alma Rubens' memoirs (a very startling account of her short and troubled life. Not for the fainthearted). They got married and he never told her about his background. She genuinely thought he was Mexican, until one day in a Mexican restaurant, when she urged him to speak Spanish to the waiter. He turned nasty and snapped at her. Their marriage was very short. I find Cortez the best when he plays nasties like in The Younger Generation (1929, F. Capra) where he plays a rich lawyer who behaves abominably towards his poor Jewish parents calling them 'servants' in front of his rich friends.

Hi there Ann. CCFan's not keen on Ricardo Cortez. Are you saying you also are not keen on him? When he's nice I can breathe a sigh of relief, but I prefer him rougher. I, too, know he's not really Latino...so none of that bothers me. Re: Alma Rubens, not for the fainthearted ey? Hmmmmmm...right up my alley then.

No, I don't get him, I've seen a few films with him in but I've never seen it. On the other hand I do see the 'it' what John Gilbert, Ramon Novarro and Valentino had. I think Buster Keaton had oodles of 'it' too and Chaplin. Oh, and Doug Fairbanks too. It's funny Ricardo is quite alike in looks to Valentino and George Raft both of whom I like. No movie watching for me, 2 kids off school ill. I'm being driven to housework by constant daytime TV.

Seeeeeee...there's something for everybody who loves classic films. Yay! Hope the kids feel better later Alison.