WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

MikeBSG · Post by **MikeBSG** » October 26th, 2007, 10:25 am

I watched "Days of Wine and Roses" on DVD last night.

I had never seen the film before, and I was very impressed with Jack Lemmon's and Lee Remick's performances. Blake Edwards did a fine job as the film started out comically and then shaded into darkness.

But even though I was seeing this film for the first time in my life, I felt like I knew everything that was going to happen (apart from the comedy) because this movie has been copied by nearly every movie-of-the-week since then that there was no surprise, no life left in it.

In a face-off between "Days of Wine and Roses" and "The Lost Weekend," I'd say that "Lost Weekend" is the better movie, because of its tighter timeframe. with "Days," you felt the movie could have stopped before it did or that it could continue on after it did.

Bogie · Post by **Bogie** » October 26th, 2007, 1:35 pm

MikeBSG wrote:I watched "Days of Wine and Roses" on DVD last night.

I had never seen the film before, and I was very impressed with Jack Lemmon's and Lee Remick's performances. Blake Edwards did a fine job as the film started out comically and then shaded into darkness.
.

I'm glad you enjoyed it. It's probably my favourite Lemmon film before he had his 2nd wave of popularity in the early 90s. (My fave movie from the latter period is GLENGARY GLENROSS) Yes, this movie has been copied by so many others after it but that's a sign of how truly great and groundbreaking it was back then.

MikeBSG · Post by **MikeBSG** » October 27th, 2007, 12:52 pm

Lemmon was astounding in "Glengary Glenn Ross." He made that movie for me. If I were to see that movie again, it would be for his performance. (I did not like Pacino in that film. He seemed to be on a different planet than the other actors.) Lemmon gave GGR its heart.

jdb1 · Post by **jdb1** » October 28th, 2007, 12:55 pm

MikeBSG wrote:Lemmon was astounding in "Glengary Glenn Ross." He made that movie for me. If I were to see that movie again, it would be for his performance. (I did not like Pacino in that film. He seemed to be on a different planet than the other actors.) Lemmon gave GGR its heart.

I felt just the opposite - I've never cared for Lemmon, and he really got on my nerves, but not in the way he was supposed to in this movie. I watch it now only because the exteriors were filmed in my neighborhood, and I'm still enough of a simple movie fan to like to see such things.

Last year I saw GGR on Broadway with Alan Alda in Lemmon's part, and he was fan-freakin'-tastic. He was pathetic and obnoxious too, but in the right way. Liev Schreiber got the Tony (he was in the Pacino part, which was Joe Mantegna's part in the original production). I think Alda deserved it more. Jeffrey Tambor was also in this production - he was pretty fabulous too.

mrsl · Post by **mrsl** » October 29th, 2007, 12:32 pm

As usual, I'm going to be the pain in the neck, nosey old biddy for this one. On Saturday morning I watched An Inconvenient Truth, and I have to say, if you haven't seen it, please do so. It's on HBO this month, and if you don't have any movie channels, go rent it. It's frightening, fascinating, and hard to ignore, and anyone who still thinks global warming is a joke, had better run for the hills if you care at all about your grandchildren. This planet needs help and the only mammals who can give that help are humans. If you are stupid enough to go along with the fools who are still poo-pooing this movie, then you're an idiot. The movie gets technical and hard to understand in some cases and also boring but the message it has is vital to people who hope to live on this planet 50 or 60 years from now, and that means your grandchildren.

Anne

cinemalover · Post by **cinemalover** » October 29th, 2007, 1:31 pm

Anne,
Thanks for your stirring recommendation of An Inconvenient Truth. A friend of mine who is active in campaigning against global warming gave me this movie on DVD to watch awhile back and I've let it sit collecting dust. I'll have to give it a look.

sandykaypax · Post by **sandykaypax** » October 29th, 2007, 1:41 pm

jdb1 wrote:
MikeBSG wrote:Lemmon was astounding in "Glengary Glenn Ross." He made that movie for me. If I were to see that movie again, it would be for his performance. (I did not like Pacino in that film. He seemed to be on a different planet than the other actors.) Lemmon gave GGR its heart.
I felt just the opposite - I've never cared for Lemmon, and he really got on my nerves, but not in the way he was supposed to in this movie. I watch it now only because the exteriors were filmed in my neighborhood, and I'm still enough of a simple movie fan to like to see such things.

Last year I saw GGR on Broadway with Alan Alda in Lemmon's part, and he was fan-freakin'-tastic. He was pathetic and obnoxious too, but in the right way. Liev Schreiber got the Tony (he was in the Pacino part, which was Joe Mantegna's part in the original production). I think Alda deserved it more. Jeffrey Tambor was also in this production - he was pretty fabulous too.

Judith, I saw that production of Glengarry Glen Ross, too. It was incredible. I don't generally care for Mamet's plays, but the actors were superb. To see Alan Alda live on stage was great.

Sandy K

jdb1 · Post by **jdb1** » October 29th, 2007, 2:43 pm

Judith, I saw that production of Glengarry Glen Ross, too. It was incredible. I don't generally care for Mamet's plays, but the actors were superb. To see Alan Alda live on stage was great.

Sandy K

The audience reaction was very interesting when I was there. I think they were expecting to see Hawkeye Pierce. Boy, did they get a surprise. Still, Alda did not alienate that audience. The man knows what he's doing, that's for sure.

Also, I can see what you mean about Mamet. I'm not too thrilled with him either, but I think this Broadway production minimized the slow, stylized Kabuki aspects that seem to be inherent in most productions of Mamet, and showed us the very human side, up close.

I do, however, like the Mamet film House of Games. In that one, I think the ritualistic aspects of building a con game are appropriate to the dialog and the characters. After repeated viewings, I still feel a little shocked by the climax and the ending.

mrsl · Post by **mrsl** » October 29th, 2007, 5:23 pm

Hi folks:

Sorry about the two divided conversations, I thought yours was through about the Mamet, GGC thing.

Anyway, Chris (cinemalover), please let me know your opinion after you've watched it, Also, please make time to do so in the next few days, I'll be watching for your response on this thread.

Anne

Post by **movieman1957** » October 29th, 2007, 8:13 pm

"Letters From Iwo Jima." Not nearly as violent or bloody as some scenes from "Flags of Our Fathers." There is comparatively little battle footage. It does give an interesting view of the Japanese who tried to defend the island.

They had their duty too. They are fanatical to their duty. They do take their failures to heart and with great shame.

The one drawback I felt was the lack of a sense of time. It didn't feel like the month or so the battle lasted.

Fine performances. Not an Eastwood type film but well done.

cinemalover · Post by **cinemalover** » October 30th, 2007, 1:50 pm

Anne,
I didn't have an opportunity to watch An Inconvenient Truth last night but I hope to in the next few days. I will certainly let you know what I think about it.
Thanks

MikeBSG · Post by **MikeBSG** » October 30th, 2007, 5:44 pm

I watched "Ready to Wear" today. I had never seen it before, but I knew that it derailed the Altman comeback that had started with "The Player" and "Short Cuts."

I found myself pleasantly surprised by the film. I really liked the Julia Roberts-Tim Robbins subplot, and I don't usually like Julia Roberts that much. Altman did his usual good job of juggling a multitude of actors and subplots, and I liked the conclusion he brought the film to. Maybe it isn't absolutely first-rate Altman, but I found it far better film than I had been led to believe.

feaito · Post by **feaito** » October 31st, 2007, 9:43 am

MikeBSG wrote:I watched "Ready to Wear" today. I had never seen it before, but I knew that it derailed the Altman comeback that had started with "The Player" and "Short Cuts."

I found myself pleasantly surprised by the film. I really liked the Julia Roberts-Tim Robbins subplot, and I don't usually like Julia Roberts that much. Altman did his usual good job of juggling a multitude of actors and subplots, and I liked the conclusion he brought the film to. Maybe it isn't absolutely first-rate Altman, but I found it far better film than I had been led to believe.

When I watched this movie back in the 1990s I enjoyed it a lot and, as you say, although not a masterpiece it's good. It has irony, it has wit, lot of first rate stars, familiar faces, good pacing, a fabulous "déja-vu" scene with Sophia Loren and Marcello Mastroianni and a good soundtrack. I feel this film was unfairly bashed when it came out. I remember watching it for the first time during an exclusive premiere at a cinema that no longer exists, and that many people walked out during its exhibition, quite unexplainably to me, because I was having a field day enjoying the many vignettes. Definitely not for all tastes.

feaito · Post by **feaito** » November 2nd, 2007, 8:13 pm

Today I watched "Without Reservations", a highly enjoyable comedy with Claudette Colbert and John Wayne. Claudette plays authoress Christopher Madden, whose bestseller is going to be transferred to the screen. On board a train to Hollywood she meets two pilots played by Wayne and Don De Fore and fun begins!

Little known actress Anne Triola is a riot as a "beetle" and beautiful Dona Drake is also in the cast as an alluring Mexican girl who tries to seduce our hero played by John Wayne, thus making Claudette very jealous.

When I saw Claudette with Cary Grant (in a cameo appearance) I suddenly realized that they never made a film together. Two of the grandest comedians of all time! That's a crime!

feaito · Post by **feaito** » November 4th, 2007, 3:34 pm

Just finished watching "No Man of Her Own" (1932) a good drama starring Lombard & Gable, in fact the only movie they ever made together. They have lots of chemistry going on and there are some fine Pre-Code moments. They make a very attractive couple.

Dorothy MacKaill is very good as Gable's "partner in crime". She looks so different (IMO-or maybe it's a wrong perception?) than in the previous year's "Kept Husbands" (1931); it looks as if she lost quite some weight: her face looks too angular and long and it does not become her as much as the rounder, fuller face she displayed in the 1931 film, where she looked better and younger.

The Silver Screen Oasis

The Silver Screen Oasis

WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?