Juror #3 says: Talk about acting! Cat on a Hot Tin Roof has performances to remember. Paul Newman gives, in my opinion, the best performance of his career. Elizabeth Taylor? Amazing in a truly difficult role. Burt Ives as "Big Daddy"? He lit up every scene he was in. The script is adapted from Tennessee Williams stage play of the same name, and what a script it is. Cutting dialogue, realistic characters and relatable content. It's a truly remarkable piece of art that can create such well rounded characters, I mean, you like and dislike all of them. They are as human as it gets. The only reason I'm not giving this movie 5/5 stars is because I can't help but want to watch a play on the stage and a film on TV. I couldn't get out of my head what an amazing theater (stage) experience this would have made. I know, that's not fair but life isn't fair...something I think Tennessee Williams would agree with me on. I rate it a truly enjoyable 4/5 stars.
girl by locker says: I had the pleasure of watching Cat on a Hot Tin Roof on the big screen at the historic Fox Theater in Atlanta, GA. It truly knocked my socks off. Paul Newman and Elizabeth Taylor in their big screen glory is truly a sight to behold. Wow.
The movie is based on Tennessee Williams’ play by the same name and basically centers around a southern family and their dying patriarch, Big Daddy Pollitt. Paul Newman plays Brick, Big Daddy’s favorite son and Elizabeth Taylor plays Maggie, Brick’s wife. The family gathers for Big Daddy’s birthday and the themes revolve around greed (trying to get Big Daddy’s money), lying (no one tells Big Daddy that he is dying), sex (Brick hasn’t been with his wife in a while), and alcoholism (the majority of the movie has Brick with a drink in hand). This is truly an actor’s film and the parts were perfectly cast. I now understand why Newman and Taylor are legends.
In the movie, Brick’s alcoholism revolves around the fact that he can’t stand “mendacity”, all the lying and hypocrisy of society and the suicide of his best friend Skipper. I read that the play focuses a lot more on the homosexual relationship between Skipper and Brick which explains why Brick isn’t interested in a sexual relationship with his wife, Maggie. For a lot of the movie, I was confused as to why there was this tension between Maggie and Brick which was later explained as Brick thinking Maggie slept with Skipper. Knowing what happened in the play made a lot more sense. The homosexuality was edited out due to Hollywood’s moral code and reportedly both Newman and Williams were upset about it.
Without a single reservation, I give this movie 5 out of 5 on Netflix. Part of it definitely had to do with the big screen experience and the energy of the people. How can it not be exciting when the theater cheers upon seeing Paul Newman shirtless? But it also had to do with the script, the story and the cast of actors. Highly recommend this film.
10/12/11
9/20/11
Film 40: Cat on a Hot Tin Roof (1958)
Film Viewing Due Date: 9/30
12 Angry Men Review
girl by locker says: I was very interested in watching this movie being that my fellow Cinema Cram partner took his writing name from the film. It was obviously one that was dear to him, and I was curious to see why that was. I was not disappointed though still not sure whether Juror #3 took his name because he relates to the Juror #3 character from the movie or whether he just likes his transformation. Hands down, without a doubt, this movie is 5 out of 5 stars on my Netflix ratings.
What was so good about the movie? First, I loved that it wasn't a typical court room drama. Meaning, the movie starts at the end of the trial and then moves into a single room in which the 12 men must determine that fate of a boy accused of killing his father. We only learn and hear the details of the case via the conversations that the men have. The one hold out juror who votes "not guilty" in the first round isn't necessarily interested in proving innocence or guilt, but rather focuses on the fact that they are about to sentence a man to death and that it deserves a conversation. He begins to explore the notion of "reasonable doubt." In the end, we do not know whether the boy is guilty or innocent, but there is enough reasonable doubt that no one feels confident sending him to his death.
The second aspect that I loved about this movie was the writing. I know the writing was solid because everything happened in a single room and I was riveted by the outcome. The writing helped build tension. But I don't just think it was the writing. I believe the visual aspect of the story helped create emotions in me though perhaps I didn't realize it at the time. I read that Sidney Lumet (the director) did a lot of work with the camera to help tell the story. In his book Making Movies he writes, "I shot the first third of the movie above eye level, shot the second third at eye level and the last third from below eye level. In that way, toward the end the ceiling began to appear. Not only were the walls closing in, the ceiling was as well. The sense of increasing claustrophobia did a lot to raise the tension of the last part of the movie." In the film's last shot, he observes, he used a wide-angle lens "to let us finally breathe."
This movie is definitely a classic and one that all should see. The dialogue, the arguments, the varying personalities treat us to a phenomenal movie but also give us insight into the a man's right to trial and the right to be innocent until proven guilty.
Juror #3 says: And we finally get to my namesake. Yes, I, Juror #3, took my name from Lee J Cobb's character in the classic film 12 Angry Men. I've seen this movie a half dozen times and I never cease wonderment at the absolutely brilliant script. The movie begins with the end of a trial, and 12 jurors deliberate as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant. One juror, played by Henry Fonda, is the lone holdout who just isn't quite convinced and wants simply to talk things over before making his decision. The audience uncovers the facts of the case through the ensuing debate where slowly but surely doubt creeps into the minds of the other jurors and provides a thrilling debate between 12 men holding the life of an 18-year-old boy in their hands. The acting is superb in Sidney Lumet's directorial debut. Again, the script is genius and the dialogue witty, cutting and crisp. There is only one real issue that I had with the movie which is the fact that a man is supposed to be judged BEYOND a reasonable doubt, something that the movie sort of ignores. Then again that would probably ruin the entire premise, and the writing is too good to worry about reality. If you have yet to see this film please consider it the next time you're looking for can't-miss entertainment. Not a surprise I'm sure but I rate 12 Angry Men 5/5 stars on netflix.
What was so good about the movie? First, I loved that it wasn't a typical court room drama. Meaning, the movie starts at the end of the trial and then moves into a single room in which the 12 men must determine that fate of a boy accused of killing his father. We only learn and hear the details of the case via the conversations that the men have. The one hold out juror who votes "not guilty" in the first round isn't necessarily interested in proving innocence or guilt, but rather focuses on the fact that they are about to sentence a man to death and that it deserves a conversation. He begins to explore the notion of "reasonable doubt." In the end, we do not know whether the boy is guilty or innocent, but there is enough reasonable doubt that no one feels confident sending him to his death.
The second aspect that I loved about this movie was the writing. I know the writing was solid because everything happened in a single room and I was riveted by the outcome. The writing helped build tension. But I don't just think it was the writing. I believe the visual aspect of the story helped create emotions in me though perhaps I didn't realize it at the time. I read that Sidney Lumet (the director) did a lot of work with the camera to help tell the story. In his book Making Movies he writes, "I shot the first third of the movie above eye level, shot the second third at eye level and the last third from below eye level. In that way, toward the end the ceiling began to appear. Not only were the walls closing in, the ceiling was as well. The sense of increasing claustrophobia did a lot to raise the tension of the last part of the movie." In the film's last shot, he observes, he used a wide-angle lens "to let us finally breathe."
This movie is definitely a classic and one that all should see. The dialogue, the arguments, the varying personalities treat us to a phenomenal movie but also give us insight into the a man's right to trial and the right to be innocent until proven guilty.
Juror #3 says: And we finally get to my namesake. Yes, I, Juror #3, took my name from Lee J Cobb's character in the classic film 12 Angry Men. I've seen this movie a half dozen times and I never cease wonderment at the absolutely brilliant script. The movie begins with the end of a trial, and 12 jurors deliberate as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant. One juror, played by Henry Fonda, is the lone holdout who just isn't quite convinced and wants simply to talk things over before making his decision. The audience uncovers the facts of the case through the ensuing debate where slowly but surely doubt creeps into the minds of the other jurors and provides a thrilling debate between 12 men holding the life of an 18-year-old boy in their hands. The acting is superb in Sidney Lumet's directorial debut. Again, the script is genius and the dialogue witty, cutting and crisp. There is only one real issue that I had with the movie which is the fact that a man is supposed to be judged BEYOND a reasonable doubt, something that the movie sort of ignores. Then again that would probably ruin the entire premise, and the writing is too good to worry about reality. If you have yet to see this film please consider it the next time you're looking for can't-miss entertainment. Not a surprise I'm sure but I rate 12 Angry Men 5/5 stars on netflix.
7/31/11
Film 39: 12 Angry Men (1957)
From Wikipedia: The film was nominated for Academy Awards in the categories of Best Director, Best Picture, and Best Writing of Adapted Screenplay. It lost to the movie The Bridge on the River Kwai in all three categories.
Film Viewing Due Date: 8/10
Baby Doll Review
Juror #3 says: Well, that was a creepy movie. In a way I wish David Lynch had gotten a chance to take a stab at this screenplay first. I would have enjoyed a more surrealist view of this script I think. Where to begin... well, Baby Doll was originally a one-act play by Tennessee Williams, who then extended the plot into a feature screenplay. The story revolves around a middle-aged man who receives permission from the father of a young woman to marry her, under one condition - he must wait until she is 20 years old to have sex with her. A short time before the woman's 20th birthday we find out the married couple has fallen on hard financial times and its causing a rift between the two. The man will do anything to reach his goal of "having the woman" and commits a crime in order to gain financially and thus keep the young woman happy enough to fulfill her promise. The creepy part of the film isn't necessarily the age discrepancy between the married couple, instead it's in the child-like nature of the woman, who is first seen sucking her thumb as she sleeps in a crib in a nursery of an old house. On one hand the story can be seen as a coming of age for "Baby Doll" as the young woman is affectionately referred to. But in the end you get the feeling that she came of age a long time ago but psychologically prefers to revert back to a more simple state. There is clearly a message here about gender roles and the way men treated women in this period but I'm not sure I completely got it. Overall the movie stuck with me though, and I attribute much of that to the solid acting. My biggest disappointment was that this was basically a stageplay being filmed and reminded me of some of the films we saw in the early forties, not something consistent with the evolution of filmmaking we had scene recently in the fifties. Overall I rate it 3/5 stars on Netflix. I applaud the effort to stretch the boundaries of societal acceptance but somehow it didn't fully work for me.
girl by locker says: Wow…and people thought the love scene between Burt Lancaster and Deborah Kerr was steamy in From Here to Eternity. In comparison to Baby Doll, From Here to Eternity was child’s play. Baby Doll is a story of a decomposing south at the end of the cotton heyday and a lovers triangle. In one corner we have Baby Doll (Carroll Baker) who is a young, married virgin who agrees to consummate her marriage when she turns 20 years old. In the other two corners, we have her husband Archie Lee (Karl Madden) a failing businessman struggling to keep his wife happy and Silva Vacarro (Eli Wallach) a Sicilian foreigner and current king of cotton in this sleepy southern town.
When Mr. Vacarro’s cotton gin ends burns down in a fire, there is one suspect (Archie Lee) and Vacarro heads to his gin in order to get proof. While Archie Lee spends the day trying to gin out the cotton, Mr. Vacarro seduces his wife Baby Doll. I am talking 30 solid minutes of raw, sexual attraction that must have shocked the viewers of the day. In fact, the Catholic Church banned the movie and probably excommunicated any of its parishioners that saw it.
The reality of the fact is, by today’s standards the movie is relatively mild – no nudity, not swearing, no visual acts of sex. However, I always find the suggestion of sex and romance much more revealing and the scenes between Mr. Vacarro and Baby Dollwere pretty stellar. In the end, you don’t know for sure whether or not they actually did the deed, but I think they did. Baby Doll goes from wearing white to black by the end of the movie and Mr. Vacarro comments on how he sees her different.
I give this movie 5 out of 5 stars. Solid acting, solid script, solid directing – and much steamier than Burt and Deborah love scene.
girl by locker says: Wow…and people thought the love scene between Burt Lancaster and Deborah Kerr was steamy in From Here to Eternity. In comparison to Baby Doll, From Here to Eternity was child’s play. Baby Doll is a story of a decomposing south at the end of the cotton heyday and a lovers triangle. In one corner we have Baby Doll (Carroll Baker) who is a young, married virgin who agrees to consummate her marriage when she turns 20 years old. In the other two corners, we have her husband Archie Lee (Karl Madden) a failing businessman struggling to keep his wife happy and Silva Vacarro (Eli Wallach) a Sicilian foreigner and current king of cotton in this sleepy southern town.
When Mr. Vacarro’s cotton gin ends burns down in a fire, there is one suspect (Archie Lee) and Vacarro heads to his gin in order to get proof. While Archie Lee spends the day trying to gin out the cotton, Mr. Vacarro seduces his wife Baby Doll. I am talking 30 solid minutes of raw, sexual attraction that must have shocked the viewers of the day. In fact, the Catholic Church banned the movie and probably excommunicated any of its parishioners that saw it.
The reality of the fact is, by today’s standards the movie is relatively mild – no nudity, not swearing, no visual acts of sex. However, I always find the suggestion of sex and romance much more revealing and the scenes between Mr. Vacarro and Baby Dollwere pretty stellar. In the end, you don’t know for sure whether or not they actually did the deed, but I think they did. Baby Doll goes from wearing white to black by the end of the movie and Mr. Vacarro comments on how he sees her different.
I give this movie 5 out of 5 stars. Solid acting, solid script, solid directing – and much steamier than Burt and Deborah love scene.
7/18/11
Film 38: Baby Doll (1956)
From Wikipedia: The movie was banned in many countries, such as Sweden, due to what was called exaggerated sexual content. The film was also condemned by Time magazine, which called it the "dirtiest American-made motion picture that had ever been legally exhibited". Due in part to the attempts to have it banned or suppressed, the film was not a commercial success. Kazan reported that it never made a profit.
Film Viewing Due Date: 7/28
Rebel Without a Cause Review
girl by locker says: With a movie like Rebel Without a Cause, you really hope you’re not going to be disappointed. It is such a classic movie and one of the few James Dean movies made so you want it to be great, and I can assuredly say that I loved the movie. It had a different feel to movies we had seen prior to this one – different theme and more sophisticated script.
The major themes of the movie are the relationships between adults and their teenage children and the underbelly of 1950’s suburbia. Maybe the golden era of American life wasn’t quite as golden as people wanted it to be.
Jim Stark (James Dean) is the movie version of Holden Caulfield from Catcher in the Rye and he is filled with classic emotions familiar to teens - confusion, angst, alienation, and rebellion. He has zero respect for his father, and there is an interesting scene in which Dean’s father tries to have a man-to-man talk with his son while wearing an apron obviously meant for a woman to wear, thus providing a view into 1950’s gender roles.
In keeping with the underbelly of 1950’s suburbia, we have Judy (Natalie Wood) who has a strange incestuous relationship with her father she desperately tries to please and Plato (Sal Mineo) with an obvious sexual attraction to Jim. Plato has been abandoned by his parents and looks to Jim as his father and friend but it is evident that he is in love with him as well. I have read that Nicholas Ray (the director) has denied the sexual attraction between Jim and Plato, but with modern eyes, I can’t see how that is possible.
Because, as I mentioned earlier, this movie had a different feeling from others in our cinema study, I give it 4 out of 5 on Netflix. I deduct points because the actors were prone to over-acting except for when it was necessary – like when Buzz goes over a cliff and dies. No one seems upset at all and everyone just runs away. Overall, this is definitely a must see for anyone interested in movies.
Juror #3 says: The first time I saw Rebel Without a Cause it was on the big screen at a local theater in NYC. I had never seen a James Dean film and remember my perception being that he was going to be a smooth, calm and cool character that every man would aspire to be. Instead we see a vulnerable, angry and confused teenager that I would have no interest in being. I walked out of the theater thinking how amazing it was to capture THE moment a teenager loses his innocence in a worldly way, and I loved what the film had done. Watching the movie for a second time was no less thrilling. To capture the teenage angst and confusion in a way that transcends time is a goal often sought and seldom achieved in art. If I wanted to be nit-picky I could focus on some flaws in the production, some poor directing and even a few lines of dialogue that seemed almost too generic to be real. But what makes Rebel Without a Cause an undisputed classic is the emotion it captures, and the feeling it portrays. Everything James Dean does in this role perfectly exemplifies the “puzzle with too many pieces” part of growing up. From his sad eyes to his insecure giggle, James Dean reminded me what highschool FELT like. There isn’t much more to say about Rebel Without a Cause except this: If you are looking for a film that anyone who was ever a teenager can relate to, this is the one. For that reason alone I rate it 5/5 stars on Netflix.
The major themes of the movie are the relationships between adults and their teenage children and the underbelly of 1950’s suburbia. Maybe the golden era of American life wasn’t quite as golden as people wanted it to be.
Jim Stark (James Dean) is the movie version of Holden Caulfield from Catcher in the Rye and he is filled with classic emotions familiar to teens - confusion, angst, alienation, and rebellion. He has zero respect for his father, and there is an interesting scene in which Dean’s father tries to have a man-to-man talk with his son while wearing an apron obviously meant for a woman to wear, thus providing a view into 1950’s gender roles.
In keeping with the underbelly of 1950’s suburbia, we have Judy (Natalie Wood) who has a strange incestuous relationship with her father she desperately tries to please and Plato (Sal Mineo) with an obvious sexual attraction to Jim. Plato has been abandoned by his parents and looks to Jim as his father and friend but it is evident that he is in love with him as well. I have read that Nicholas Ray (the director) has denied the sexual attraction between Jim and Plato, but with modern eyes, I can’t see how that is possible.
Because, as I mentioned earlier, this movie had a different feeling from others in our cinema study, I give it 4 out of 5 on Netflix. I deduct points because the actors were prone to over-acting except for when it was necessary – like when Buzz goes over a cliff and dies. No one seems upset at all and everyone just runs away. Overall, this is definitely a must see for anyone interested in movies.
Juror #3 says: The first time I saw Rebel Without a Cause it was on the big screen at a local theater in NYC. I had never seen a James Dean film and remember my perception being that he was going to be a smooth, calm and cool character that every man would aspire to be. Instead we see a vulnerable, angry and confused teenager that I would have no interest in being. I walked out of the theater thinking how amazing it was to capture THE moment a teenager loses his innocence in a worldly way, and I loved what the film had done. Watching the movie for a second time was no less thrilling. To capture the teenage angst and confusion in a way that transcends time is a goal often sought and seldom achieved in art. If I wanted to be nit-picky I could focus on some flaws in the production, some poor directing and even a few lines of dialogue that seemed almost too generic to be real. But what makes Rebel Without a Cause an undisputed classic is the emotion it captures, and the feeling it portrays. Everything James Dean does in this role perfectly exemplifies the “puzzle with too many pieces” part of growing up. From his sad eyes to his insecure giggle, James Dean reminded me what highschool FELT like. There isn’t much more to say about Rebel Without a Cause except this: If you are looking for a film that anyone who was ever a teenager can relate to, this is the one. For that reason alone I rate it 5/5 stars on Netflix.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
