Sometimes it's just best to let the brand names go.AndyDursin wrote:I agree with that John. Does anyone remember the final role of...I dunno...James Mason? Agreed it doesn't really matter in terms of their entire body of work -- I think MJ just means it in the context of the audience, and being able to enjoy them in another role again. At least that's how I view it.
I think the issue with DeNiro & Pacino is they still have "time" left and they've gone through a really prolonged period, both of them, of phoning it in.
Connery had a nice kind of "farewell" movie anyway with FINDING FORRESTER, and his late career, as you mentioned, will always be marked by his Oscar winning role in THE UNTOUCHABLES. And he was wise to turn down the latest INDIANA JONES...even LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN had more going for it than KINGDOM OF THE TIRED SKULL.
Hackman has always been a workaholic so there are lots of films to choose from. And he's been in supporting turns for years and years anyway.
Pacino has kind of been on a steady decline since his Oscar win in SCENT OF A WOMAN. Other than HEAT and, say, an amusing performance like DEVIL'S ADVOCATE where he was absurdly over the top, he's been cashing it in for a while. Same with DeNiro.
The two of them could be doing some interesting roles at this stage, but each of them have been..well..making 88 MINUTES and RIGHTEOUS KILL.
rate the last movie you saw
-
The Pessimist
- Posts: 165
- Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:15 pm
'Sorry about that one.' -Ed Wood
KF PANDA is a fun little movie plus it has some really beautiful artwork that might give WALL-E some competition at the Oscars.
Would SPACE CHIMPS rate even below that great, great simian film DUNSTON CHECKS IN? Oh, my. . .
Would SPACE CHIMPS rate even below that great, great simian film DUNSTON CHECKS IN? Oh, my. . .
JDvDHeise
"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons."-Gene Wilder to Cleavon Little in BLAZING SADDLES
"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons."-Gene Wilder to Cleavon Little in BLAZING SADDLES
-
Monterey Jack
- Posts: 10064
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
- Location: Walpole, MA
-
The Pessimist
- Posts: 165
- Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:15 pm
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 34956
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
One of my favorites! A great HD-DVD transfer (same on BD) too.mkaroly wrote:THE SEARCHERS: 10/10. Outstanding movie- symmetrical and thought-provoking with gorgeous cinematography and subtle nuances. I am not a fan of Westerns and was never a fan of John Wayne, but after seeing this film I am beginning to understand why people liked him so much. Brilliant.
I saw THE SEARCHERS years ago and didn't care for it, but certain moments lingered.
Fairly recently I saw it again, and the thing that got to me is that it's close to being an art film. Some of the late scenes of Wayne going through some odd desert scenery, and his general attitude, make this a precursor to Peckinpah's bitter heroes.
It's a TROUBLING film that leaves you lots to chew on, and frankly it's got deeper thematic content than 90% of the "art" movies of that decade.
I don't see this movie getting as much respect as movies like BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI or some of the other movies of the era that focus on men under pressure on large canvases, but it deserves it.
Fairly recently I saw it again, and the thing that got to me is that it's close to being an art film. Some of the late scenes of Wayne going through some odd desert scenery, and his general attitude, make this a precursor to Peckinpah's bitter heroes.
It's a TROUBLING film that leaves you lots to chew on, and frankly it's got deeper thematic content than 90% of the "art" movies of that decade.
I don't see this movie getting as much respect as movies like BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI or some of the other movies of the era that focus on men under pressure on large canvases, but it deserves it.
John
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 34956
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
From what I've seen over the years it has appeared on more "critical consensus" lists of the supposed "best movies ever" than BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI...either way it's one of the great films of the '50s. And a gorgeous high definition transfer on top of itI don't see this movie getting as much respect as movies like BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI or some of the other movies of the era that focus on men under pressure on large canvases, but it deserves it.
THE WILD BUNCH A+
There are movies I like, movies I love, movies I enjoy, and then there are movies like this.
Sometimes, I don't even think of this movie when compiling "best" lists, because there are times when I actually dislike it, when I don't like the anger, the sourness, the elements of Peckinpah's personality which permeate the movie.
Yet when I am in the right frame of mind, I realize this is one of those "tentpole" movies I simply couldn't do without. If these few movies weren't a part of my memory, I would be different from the way I am now--how, I'm not sure, but this thing had an impact on me I've never really reconciled.
That this movie exists is why I am so frequently sour about movies other people rightly accept as "just entertainment". This is a movie which was made by a man who clearly was conflicted about the actual movie itself. Can you imagine a modern director of a large-scale movie being CONFLICTED about thematic elements of that movie? No, because such movies are either simplistic or are propaganda for the director's established biases.
In other words, this is art as living thing. It contradicts itself, it screams when people would rather it talk in an indoor voice, it has all kinds of evil dark stuff--not "dark" stuff, but dark stuff--mixed up with a boy's adventure view of loyalty and friendship. That these sentiments are embodied by characters who don't even seem to LIKE each other that much is astonishing and maddening. Sometimes i wish things in this were more clear-cut, made more "sense". But Peckinpah was able to get so much of the confusion of life into this movie, the way you can hate someone one second and defend him the next, how someone can be trying to kill you and you respect him more than someone who's been loyal to you, and on and on.
Jerry Fielding's best score, Lucien Ballard's greatest achievement, one of Holden's best roles, and the best gun battle ever, because there is so much happening in it, and I don't just mean the killing. The climax isn't really a gun battle, but a condensed war, the final actions of men who are walking to death with their eyes wide open. That's why the effect is so shattering, because we're seeing men we should hate earn our respect as they march to certain doom because it's just the right thing to do when one of them has been taken captive by the devil you've empowered. I can think of very few action scenes that are so EMOTIONAL, and have such an emotional impact on me. Action scenes are usually about getting excited; this one is about facing the end. That's some powerful stuff for a movie.
This movie is one of the reasons why when I read what a great director (name deleted) is, I can't help but laugh. He's simply not on the same planet as Peckinpah, who made many imperfect movies. This one isn't perfect either, it's better than perfect, it's as flawed (and in the same ways) as its maker. That's art.
There are movies I like, movies I love, movies I enjoy, and then there are movies like this.
Sometimes, I don't even think of this movie when compiling "best" lists, because there are times when I actually dislike it, when I don't like the anger, the sourness, the elements of Peckinpah's personality which permeate the movie.
Yet when I am in the right frame of mind, I realize this is one of those "tentpole" movies I simply couldn't do without. If these few movies weren't a part of my memory, I would be different from the way I am now--how, I'm not sure, but this thing had an impact on me I've never really reconciled.
That this movie exists is why I am so frequently sour about movies other people rightly accept as "just entertainment". This is a movie which was made by a man who clearly was conflicted about the actual movie itself. Can you imagine a modern director of a large-scale movie being CONFLICTED about thematic elements of that movie? No, because such movies are either simplistic or are propaganda for the director's established biases.
In other words, this is art as living thing. It contradicts itself, it screams when people would rather it talk in an indoor voice, it has all kinds of evil dark stuff--not "dark" stuff, but dark stuff--mixed up with a boy's adventure view of loyalty and friendship. That these sentiments are embodied by characters who don't even seem to LIKE each other that much is astonishing and maddening. Sometimes i wish things in this were more clear-cut, made more "sense". But Peckinpah was able to get so much of the confusion of life into this movie, the way you can hate someone one second and defend him the next, how someone can be trying to kill you and you respect him more than someone who's been loyal to you, and on and on.
Jerry Fielding's best score, Lucien Ballard's greatest achievement, one of Holden's best roles, and the best gun battle ever, because there is so much happening in it, and I don't just mean the killing. The climax isn't really a gun battle, but a condensed war, the final actions of men who are walking to death with their eyes wide open. That's why the effect is so shattering, because we're seeing men we should hate earn our respect as they march to certain doom because it's just the right thing to do when one of them has been taken captive by the devil you've empowered. I can think of very few action scenes that are so EMOTIONAL, and have such an emotional impact on me. Action scenes are usually about getting excited; this one is about facing the end. That's some powerful stuff for a movie.
This movie is one of the reasons why when I read what a great director (name deleted) is, I can't help but laugh. He's simply not on the same planet as Peckinpah, who made many imperfect movies. This one isn't perfect either, it's better than perfect, it's as flawed (and in the same ways) as its maker. That's art.
John
-
Monterey Jack
- Posts: 10064
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
- Location: Walpole, MA
I agree JSW- it is a troubling film that leaves you lots to chew on. I loved the opening and closing shots from the doorway which made me think of a picture frame capturing snapshots of the West. Wayne's character is complex and he moves from enraged, vengeful anger to a tender quietness in his acting. When he picks up Debbie at the end of the film (mirroring himself doing the same when she was a kid) and says, "Debbie, let's go home.", his voice is so tender that it really touched my heart. The opening sequences with Martha, Ethan, adn Aaron with the subtle glances, the gestures, and the tensions were so well done. SPOILER ALERT!! The final shot is troubling since Ethan is left alone to wander again, without a love and without a home. The more I thought about the film, the more I liked it.JSWalsh wrote:It's a TROUBLING film that leaves you lots to chew on, and frankly it's got deeper thematic content than 90% of the "art" movies of that decade.
THE SEARCHERS was, for a long time, a Ford film I admired but did not like very much. The comedy stuff with Ken Curtis is really awful (he was the best she could do?) and the same goes for the scenes with the woman that Jeff Hunter gets married to in trade. But every time I see it I get drawn into it by two things-Hoch's cinematography and that performance by Wayne, which gets better everytime I watch it. I would rank it as one of the best performances of the first half of the 20th century for two scenes: Wayne telling what happened to Lucy and the scene where Wayne looks back at what happened to the repatrioted prisoners at the fort-the look of cold fury on his face is truly frightening.
Waynes greatest performances (IMHO): SHE WORE A YELLOW RIBBON, THE SHOOTIST, THE MAN WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALENCE, SANDS OF IWO JIMA, STAGECOACH, THE SEARCHERS, ISLAND IN THE SKY. As happy as I am that he won the Oscar for TRUE GRIT, I personally think he was so much better in any of these roles, as well as THE COWBOYS. He may have been my opposite politically, but damn he was a helluva actor.
As for THE WILD BUNCH, only UNFORGIVEN comes close as far as greatness in later westerns is concerned. I've heard that a remake is in the works-say it ain't so!
Waynes greatest performances (IMHO): SHE WORE A YELLOW RIBBON, THE SHOOTIST, THE MAN WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALENCE, SANDS OF IWO JIMA, STAGECOACH, THE SEARCHERS, ISLAND IN THE SKY. As happy as I am that he won the Oscar for TRUE GRIT, I personally think he was so much better in any of these roles, as well as THE COWBOYS. He may have been my opposite politically, but damn he was a helluva actor.
As for THE WILD BUNCH, only UNFORGIVEN comes close as far as greatness in later westerns is concerned. I've heard that a remake is in the works-say it ain't so!
JDvDHeise
"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons."-Gene Wilder to Cleavon Little in BLAZING SADDLES
"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons."-Gene Wilder to Cleavon Little in BLAZING SADDLES
I'm not talking best lists but more mainstream interest. Some people who like Wayne--people who call films "John Wayne movies" instead of "John Ford movies"--not film addicts but people who "like movies"--don't give it the love it deserves.AndyDursin wrote:From what I've seen over the years it has appeared on more "critical consensus" lists of the supposed "best movies ever" than BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI...either way it's one of the great films of the '50s. And a gorgeous high definition transfer on top of itI don't see this movie getting as much respect as movies like BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI or some of the other movies of the era that focus on men under pressure on large canvases, but it deserves it.
John
That's a great post because I agree with every word!Jedbu wrote:THE SEARCHERS was, for a long time, a Ford film I admired but did not like very much.
One of the truly valuable things about art is that individual works can help chart one's personal growth as a human being--the work remains the same, so why did you like it/dislike it once, then when you come to it again you dislike it/like it? Because YOU've changed.
THE SEARCHERS is a case of that for me, and I'm glad I gave it another chance. The humor rankles but not as much as I thought, and the photography (which isn't just a collection of cool images, it helps illustrate the characters psychologically in terms of their relationship to the locations, framing, etc) is outstanding without being intrusive.
As for a WILD BUNCH remake, a more pointless exercise I can't imagine. At least the wretched TEXAS CHAINSAW remake kept you going with the hope that Jessica Biel's t-shirt might come off.
John