Movie Classics that totally escape me

[Michael Price]

The other sci-fi movie I think is a likewise recent classic is Watchmen. Entirely adult by design, with one of the best baddies in the genre (Matthew Goode as Adrian Veidt is a delight), this does not assume the audience is entirely comprised of 14 year old boys.

The movie grated on me because they changed two of the best lines from the comic book:
'thermodynamic miracles' and 'my perspective'

 

[Klystron]

You didn't like, The man who shot Liberty Valence?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Who_Shot_Liberty_Valance

If this is an open question, then my answer is yes and no.

As a child, I liked the movie. Wayne's character foreshadows his ultimate fate in "The Shootist". Scatman Crother's character demonstrates loyalty; Stewart's peace and rule of law. No doubt Lee Marvin makes the meanest bad guy outlaw in film.

As an educated adult, even allowing for the movie's time and place, the racism rankles. Scatman should take the shot not just play gun-bearer. The helpless wimpy lawyer quaking in his boots from big bad Liberty rankles as much. Louis L'Amour answered this slight by creating an entire family of gun-toting lawyers in Western fiction who confront bullies while upholding rule of law. Said one lawyer to his young brother about suppressing violence,
"Did ya' read him from the Book?"
"Nope, but I showed him the pictures."

In real life Isom Dart held his own in much worse circumstances while Bat and brother Ed Masterson both practiced law and fought outlaws often with a badge of office.

 

[pinball1970]

Yeah, upon reflection, I concluded that's what Verhoeven wanted it to be.

But it didn't wash with me. It reads analogous to someone deliberately dressing in bizarre contentious fashion, knowing others will mock him, but taking solace in the rationalization that he mocked himself first.

I see Verhoeven as not having had the courage of his convictions to put his money where his mouth is to tell a story he actually believes in.

Immature people go on about what they don't like, and how bad this or that is. It takes courage to put your beliefs on the line and say what you do like, and how you can inspire others to think that too. Verhoeven has an obligation, as a director, wielding a zillion dollar budget, to be courageous.

I watched this at the cinema, I hate the flicks because you always have kids talking or doing annoying stuff but I remember this. What was that film? What was it? Before I was out of the cinema I was asking this. Was this a statement on Vietnam? Iraq? Government? NATO? The acting was very strange in parts, last scene, 'its afraid!' followed by the lead lady who was just impaled in the shoulder horrifically, walking and laughing with old school mates. That was tongue in cheek and something else.

 

[DaveC426913]

I have no idea whatever what anyone saw in "Pretty Woman".

I am comfortable enough with my manliness to enjoy rom-coms, and my wife watched it with me. We kept looking at each other, going "What? Why?"

Now, to be fair, we didn't see it first run; we saw it after Roberts became a hit, so it didn't help that we already knew her with that giant disarming smile, so there's no way we could see her as a hooker (even one with a heart of gold).

 

[member 656954]

The movie [Watchmen] grated on me because they changed two of the best lines from the comic book:
'thermodynamic miracles' and 'my perspective'

I had the advantage of never even knowing there was a comic, so it was entirely fresh. I'd say, in general, that a movie from a book or graphic novel is pretty much never going to live up to the original content.

 

[Bystander]

I have no idea whatever what anyone saw in "Pretty Woman".

Just checked IMDB, and can't say there's anything she's done that I've been able to sit through start to finish---The Pelican Brief in about four or five different sittings for Denzel Washington and the environmental story (non-existent), plus no conclusion.

 

[mathwonk]

I confess also to having appreciated Liberty Valance in the distant past, but not so much for Wayne's role in it, and more recently I noticed that Wayne's character seems to commit murder.

 

[Klystron]

Since we are discussing recent classics, I confess to liking Quentin Tarantino and Roger Avary's 1991 "Reservoir Dogs". Many friends told me I would like it despite the violence, "They talk constantly but never show the actual heist. You'll like it."

One of my favorite crime dramas, despite the violence, mild in comparison to most crime movies. Terrific acting, writing, sets, cars, music, directing and Tarantino fills a small role himself as "Mr. Brown". Lawrence Tierny, "Joe Cabot", starred in old time crime flicks before serving time for extortion, also played Elaine's scary father on "Seinfeld".

 

[mathwonk]

For a classic scene of an interrupted duel, that I prefer to the one in Liberty Valance, there is the near - bar - fight in From Here to Eternity, wherein Sarge confronts Fatso Judson, about to knife fight with Prew, arguing something like: "He's in my company and if you kill him you just make extra paperwork for me". This recalls a situation involving friends of mine working the midnight shift at a gas station in Roxbury, Mass., in the 60's, and threatened by a knife wielding employee. The foreman responded that the knife wielder could cut anyone he liked from the dayshift, but that my friends were on his midnight shift and he wasn't about to let them be disabled. So for me, that scene had a ring of reality.

 

[member 656954]

But it [Starship Troopers] didn't wash with me. It reads analogous to someone deliberately dressing in bizarre contentious fashion, knowing others will mock him, but taking solace in the rationalization that he mocked himself first.

Heinlein hammered out the novel in less than a month and it's generally taken as a statement on his view that the morals and military standards were in serious social decline after WWII. I devoured it - and his other novels - but even as a teenager, his right wing views were pretty clear...and I didn't even understand what right wing meant at the time.

I guess that perspective of decline, in the late 1990s when the movie was filmed, probably did not resonate as readily, and I recall when watching it that it did seem very jokey, rather than having the seriousness that Heinlein was calling for.

So, was Verhoeven the right director for the content? Debatable. Was it a good movie? Not really. Is it a classic? Not at all.

 

[DaveC426913]

Since we are discussing recent classics, I confess to liking Quentin Tarantino and Roger Avary's 1991 "Reservoir Dogs". Many friends told me I would like it despite the violence, "They talk constantly but never show the actual heist. You'll like it."

Had one of the most riveting suspense scenes in modern cinema. I swear I chewed my nails to the first knuckle.

 

[Michael Price]

I confess also to having appreciated Liberty Valance in the distant past, but not so much for Wayne's role in it, and more recently I noticed that Wayne's character seems to commit murder.

It was more a James Stewart, Lee Marvin movie. Never a great fan of John Wayne.

 

[Michael Price]

Since we are discussing recent classics, I confess to liking Quentin Tarantino and Roger Avary's 1991 "Reservoir Dogs". Many friends told me I would like it despite the violence, "They talk constantly but never show the actual heist. You'll like it."

One of my favorite crime dramas, despite the violence, mild in comparison to most crime movies. Terrific acting, writing, sets, cars, music, directing and Tarantino fills a small role himself as "Mr. Brown". Lawrence Tierny, "Joe Cabot", starred in old time crime flicks before serving time for extortion, also played Elaine's scary father on "Seinfeld".

I loved "Reservoir Dogs" - great opening scene with the discussion of tipping! Tarantino's more recent stuff just hasn't been as good; he's definitely lost his touch.

 

[DennisN]

I am going to watch The Wizard of Oz since it is at number one on the list

I have seen it now, and I liked it. Particularly the story, which have quite a few interesting "universal" messages, which would be a shame to mention here since it would spoil it for those who haven't seen the movie. It's also a story that can be interpreted in different ways. But the good story is as I understand it largely thanks to the original novel.

The movie also gets a big extra plus from me for this (SPOILER WARNING!):

Spoiler

The movie wonderfully mixes reality and fantasy in one and the same movie, since the fantasy story resembles Dorothy's reality. This is further enhanced since the same actors are used in both the reality story and the fantasy story. I actually did not get that until the end of the movie, and this pleased me very much. Quite powerful.

I don't know if this role setup was in the original novel or not.

Furthermore, one of my favorite songs was in the movie, Somewhere over the Rainbow. I've always liked that one in particular.

And last, but not least, I think Judy Garland did an excellent performance as Dorothy.

I can easily understand why this movie is so liked. I will keep it in my collection .

 

[pinball1970]

I have seen it now, and I liked it. Particularly the story, which have quite a few interesting "universal" messages, which would be a shame to mention here since it would spoil it for those who haven't seen the movie. It's also a story that can be interpreted in different ways. But the good story is as I understand it largely thanks to the original novel.

The movie also gets a big extra plus from me for this (SPOILER WARNING!):

Spoiler

The movie wonderfully mixes reality and fantasy in one and the same movie, since the fantasy story resembles Dorothy's reality. This is further enhanced since the same actors are used in both the reality story and the fantasy story. I actually did not get that until the end of the movie, and this pleased me very much. Quite powerful.

I don't know if this role setup was in the original novel or not.

Furthermore, one of my favorite songs was in the movie, Somewhere over the Rainbow. I've always liked that one in particular.

And last, but not least, I think Judy Garland did an excellent performance as Dorothy.

I can easily understand why this movie is so liked. I will keep it in my collection .

WOO is great. Can you remember when the scarecrow recites a maths equation at the end? When he gets his diploma?

 

[DennisN]

Can you remember when the scarecrow recites a maths equation at the end? When he gets his diploma?

Yes . There were quite a few moments in the movie which made me smile. And think.

 

[Klystron]

This thread reminds me of a Danny Kaye movie (the title escapes me) where he recites/sings the Pythagorean theorem. I learned the basis of quadratic equations from that movie.

In the US in the 1950-1960's "Wizard of Oz" was broadcast at least once a year. I did not see Frank Baum books in the local library but many favorite authors described them.

 

[DaveC426913]

Danny Kaye movie (the title escapes me) where he recites/sings the Pythagorean theorem

:furiously Googling:
Merry Andrew.


But not A Modern Major General...

I'm very well acquainted, too, with matters mathematical,
I understand equations, both the simple and quadratical,
About binomial theorem, I'm teeming with a lot o' news,
(Lot o' news...)
(Got it!)
With many cheerful facts about the square of the hypotenuse!

 

[PeroK]

For a classic scene of an interrupted duel, that I prefer to the one in Liberty Valance, there is the near - bar - fight in From Here to Eternity, wherein Sarge confronts Fatso Judson, about to knife fight with Prew, arguing something like: "He's in my company and if you kill him you just make extra paperwork for me".

The aborted knife fight is between Judson and Maggio, surely?

With Prew and Judson it's the real thing.

Another anti-hero who commits murder!

 

[DennisN]

I don't know if this role setup was in the original novel or not.

Spoiler warning issued again .
I did a bit of research and according to this clip (3:00) in a Wizard of Oz commentary, which is quite interesting and detailed in itself, the screen writer of the movie added quite a bit of glue between reality and fantasy. Very competently done, I think. I haven't read the book, and maybe this is one of the few movies which actually is better than the book, perhaps?

Two other movies which I personally think are better than the book versions, debatable of course, is The Fellowship of the Ring (trailer), because I think it has a better "flow" than the novel (and this comes from a Tolkien fan! ) and Contact (trailer), because I think it has more "life" in the characters.

 

[Janus]

Two other movies which I personally think is better than the book versions, debatable of course, is The Fellowship of the Ring (trailer), because I think it has a better "flow" than the novel (and this comes from a Tolkien fan! ) and Contact (trailer), because I think it has more "life" in the characters.

A movie that was, in my opinion, improved at least in some ways, over the book was Jurassic Park. I just think that Crichton got heavy-handed with the "everything that could go wrong, goes wrong" plot device in the book.
The movie trimmed a lot of this down.

 

[DennisN]

A movie that was, in my opinion, improved at least in some ways, over the book was Jurassic Park. I just think that Crichton got heavy-handed with the "everything that could go wrong, goes wrong" plot device in the book.
The movie trimmed a lot of this down.

I haven't read the book, but I liked the movie a lot.

 

[DennisN]

Movie classics I do enjoy:

• Casablanca (1942, Michael Curtiz)
  Cool story, cool setting. I was pleasantly surprised by the movie.

It was a long time ago I saw Casablanca, and today I happened to play the movie to have in the background while I was doing other stuff. But instead I was completely drawn into the movie and ended up watching it again . It is a remarkably tight movie with very interesting characters and very tight dialogue. I think I liked it even better this time . And it is (2019-1942) = 77 years old. It is also worth noting that it was a contemporary movie, as it was released in 1942-1943 during a pivotal period in the second world war, when the allied invaded French North Africa. And a couple of months later the Soviet Union turned the tide on the Eastern front.

 

[mathwonk]

thank you perok, absolutely right. it was no doubt prew who picked up the discarded knife and then fought for real!

 

[DaveC426913]

Wanna feel old?

Star Wars is now closer in time to the German invasion of Poland and the start of the Second World War than it is to today.

 

[Bystander]

First World War

WW II?

 

[DaveC426913]

WW II?

What? Are you on the weed?



(Thanks.)

 

[pinball1970]

Spoiler warning issued again .
I did a bit of research and according to this clip (3:00) in a Wizard of Oz commentary, which is quite interesting and detailed in itself, the screen writer of the movie added quite a bit of glue between reality and fantasy. Very competently done, I think. I haven't read the book, and maybe this is one of the few movies which actually is better than the book, perhaps?

Two other movies which I personally think are better than the book versions, debatable of course, is The Fellowship of the Ring (trailer), because I think it has a better "flow" than the novel (and this comes from a Tolkien fan! ) and Contact (trailer), because I think it has more "life" in the characters.

I went to see LOTR when it came out, we booked tickets to get decent seats read the guardian reviews (very close to the book apparently) and the release date was on my b/day
I hated it.
Looking at it now as a film its great (acting casting effects) but nothing like the book in terms of pace story building and glaring omissions/additions
All the implied terror and lurking suspense and menace of the passage under Moria, or what the wraiths were, or who Aragorn was were just announced, no build up no teasing no guessing, just there you go.
They had Legolas assisting Frodo’s escape from the wraiths on his way to Rivendell when it was Glorfindel (important as he was a powerful elf lord)
All that nonsense at the tomb of Balin with trolls and what not and don’t get me started on Arwens part – complete fabrication. If they thought Tom Bombadill was too much to add why did they add pointless stuff that was not in the book?
They should have done 6 films of each book and not rushed it, 9 hours just isn’t long enough , 18-20 would have done it more justice.

 

[pinball1970]

I haven't read the book, but I liked the movie a lot.

The Warriors 1978 is a great film so I read the book after.

I was disappointed. Sol Yuri
I thought Jaws was rubbish too, amazing film though.

Peter Benchley.
The book that matched the film the best for me was the Omen amazing film.
Funny thing is after checking on wiki (just now) as I could not remember the author, it turns out it’s the same guy who did the film!
The books were just marketing tools weeks before the film releases!

 

[DennisN]

Looking at it now as a film its great (acting casting effects) but nothing like the book in terms of pace story building and glaring omissions/additions

For me, it's just the Fellowship I like better as a movie. I think The Two Towers and The Return of the King are better as novels.

Regarding omissions I think it is due to the reduced attention span of a film audience compared to a reader, along with the fact that only three movies were planned, which themselves were quite huge enterprises, financially and logistically. There was a lot of ground to cover in the first one including the background and mythology, which I think was excellently done in the very first part of the movie where Blanchett/Galadriel told the essential background. That intro is actually among my absolute favorite parts in all of the three movies.

Regarding additions my guess is they were made due to an increased need for speed and thus, a good flow, in the story building and perhaps the character arcs. Regarding the Arwen additions* maybe they did that to give the character of Aragorn some extra motivation in his participation, by establishing his romantic interest and close connection to the elves. Just a guess off the top of my hat .

Regarding the omission of Tom Bombadill, another guess of mine is that covering Bombadill could complicate the story with a character that, if I remember correctly, only appears in the first novel and has no impact after that. Including Bombadill might also have lessened the perceived threat of the one ring for an audience, as Bombadill is the only one in the story which the ring has no effect upon whatsoever.

* Edit:
On a second thought they might have added Arwen to have one more female with some story in the movie. Otherwise there would have been only one such female, Galadriel, in a story which is full of male characters, including all the males in the fellowship itself.