by Sam Juliano
Francis Ford Coppola’s great American epic of organized crime and the machinations of the Corleone family, captured the top two spots in the 1970’s poll by the biggest landslide of any contest to date. The second part, Godfather 2, came in first place, edging out the first film by a vote total of 652 to 627. Some voters argued that the second film had even more depth than th efirst, and pointed to the segments with Robert De Niro’s coming-of-age as Vito Corleone as the most fascinating of all the story threads in the full epic. The ascendency of Michael Corleone to the head of the family, and his increased ruthlessness further embellished what may be the most famous two part film in the history of film. Few polls conducted on the net or in other publications have failed to annoint these films at the top, regardless of which placed first. The film received support from both the art house lovers and the most commercially conscious voters, demonstrating astounding cross-over appeal. Ingmar Bergman’s Cries and Whispers finished third with 439 points, Peter Bogdonovich’s The Last Picture Show placed fourth with 435, and Taxi Driver took fifth, edging out A Clockwork Orange, 424 to 420. A total of 45 ballots were cast, the most ever for any poll thus far.
The Top 25 Films of the 1970’s
1 The Godfather Part II (Coppola) 652
2 The Godfather (Coppola) 627
3 Cries and Whispers (Bergman; Sweden) 439
4 The Last Picture Show (Bogdanovich) 435
5 Taxi Driver (Scorsese) 424
6 A Clockwork Orange (Kubrick) 420
7 Apocalypse Now (Coppola) 396
8 Chinatown (Polanski) 376
9 Days of Heaven (Malick) 276
10 The Conformist (Bertolucci; Italy) 273
11 Network (Lumet) 264
12 Manhattan (Allen) 260
13 The Spirit of the Beehive (Erice; Spain) 252
14 Annie Hall (Allen) 245
15 Aguirre, Wrath of God (Herzog; W Germany) 236
16 Mon Oncle Antoine (Jutra; Canada) 234
17 Barry Lyndon (Kubrick) 228
18 Amarcord (Fellini; Italy) 200
19 Cabaret (Fosse) 198
20 Picnic at Hanging Rock (Weir; Australia) 181
21 Céline et Julie vont en Bâteau (Rivette; France) 174
22 Le Cercle Rouge (Melville; France) 164
23 One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest (Forman) 162
24 Killer of Sheep (Burnett) 159
25 Star Wars (Lucas) 141
Can’t really complain about these choices at all. It was clear almost from the beginning what would win. The only question I think was which Godfather would prevail. Bergman and Bogdonovich’s films are masterpieces.
Yes, Bobby, the only question all along was which one.
You all at WITD did a great job and it is a terrific list. I still need to see some of the foreign selections (The Spirit and the Beehive, Le Cercle Rouge) but all are fine choices, though Star Wars, which I have never been a fan of, I felt was somewhat too high. Thanks for all the work that had to be put into this.
Thanks very much John. You have been a large part of this venture from the very start and we thank you for all your good will and support (and excellent ballot). The Melville and Enrice are definitely essential, and I agree STAR WARS really had no business making the Top 25. But some others thought otherwise. LOL!!!
This one was a bit of no-brainer…but I like the nice mixture of choices here…a lot of classic American heavy-hitters but also some “smaller” foreign films and, of course, the requisite Kubricks and Bergmans and such.
I like seeing MANHATTAN and NETWORK mashed right up there together in the middle.
And STAR WARS snuck in there as a surprise entry at 25! I don’t particularly agree with that, but it’s refreshing to see the diversity of tastes from WitD readers.
Great job as always, gentlemen. Now on to the ’80’s!
Thanks very much David. You have been a real trooper for this site throughout this polling. Your insights, great taste, kindness and enthusiasm is vital to WitD.
Well it comes as no surprise that these great American epics caught the top slots. THE GODFATHER saga has been increasing in public and critical popularity yearly since its release. Analysis of these films over the years have seen the intelligentsia notch their importance in American cinema with every new-found theory that takes them away from mere “popular” entertainment and instead relegates them to high art and metaphorical statements on politics and the immoral nature of crime. I can understand the groups love and fascination with both of these films as repeat viewings have magnified the themes, brilliant artistry of the director and his crew and the sensational performances from every member of the cast. I was, however, a little shocked that with all the talk of Kubrick and A CLOCKWORK ORANGE (in particular), that the master director didn’t place higher in the polls. No matter, this was still a stunning collection of films represented!
Thanks very much Dennis for your unwavering support. I agree with you that the Kubricks seemed headed for a higher placement. But they both at the end of the day did extremely well.
I’m also a bit surprised that “A Clockwork Orange” didn’t place higher, but when you look at the numbers it’s clear that everything is lumped together. The diversified mix is heartening, and while the top spots weren’t surprising, neither were they undeserved. I am really looking ahead to the 80’s. A job well-done for all concerned.
For nine months you have supported us Frank. Your voice has been invaluable.
Nice to see films like ‘The Conformist’ making the top ten. This list serves as an impeccable reference for anyone needing a representative survey of 70’s cinema.
I’m a big a fan of “Star Wars” as they come, but I would’ve listed “THX 1138″ instead. Still, it’s an important film, influential in all the best ways, and containing enough spark and originality to merit a place at any openminded table. The ones I’m not so sure of? “Amarcord” (C’mon, Fellini did better, even in the 70’s), “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest” (Forman’s done some decent work over the years, but he and this studio commodification of Ken Kessey are both vastly overrated; if you wanted vintage Nicholson, I’d have taken “Five Easy Pieces”), and “Manhattan” (Don’t get me wrong, it might be my favorite of Allen’s films, but the more I watch it, the more I see and feel how hollow and superficial it is; the most banal and offensive of his auto-biographical wish fulfilment comedies photographed at lushly and poetically by Gordon Willis).
Bob: Thanks so very much for your participation in the poll, and for this much-appreciated follow-up comment. I kinda agree with Joe as far as MANHATTAN is concerned, but to be honest I do concur with you on CUCKOO’S NEST being overrrated (I won’t tell my wide though…LOL!!) and that AMARCORD, as endearing as it is isn’t vintage Fellini. True too what you say there about THX 1138. I hope you will be here for the 80’s which begins on Monday. Thanks again!
I totally disagree with Bob Clark on what he says here about ‘Manhattan’. You won’t get many (or any) serious movie lovers to back that up. If that film is ‘hollow’ and ’superficial’ well then cinema is a useless art form. Just my two cents.
This has been some ride, and I thank Allan, Sam and Tony for giving movie lovers two months of bliss. 80’s here we come!
And thanks to you Joe for your daily input.
The polling may have been predictible, but the results have accurately gaged the greatest works of cinema in the 1970’s. It’s amazing how much work went into this project on a day-to-day basis, and everyone should take a bow.
You should take a bow as well David! Thank You!
The tabulating of our polls is always a lot of work but for some reason I enjoy it.
This is only my opinion.. But, STAR WARS is absolutely influential in all the wrong ways. A pseudo-religious mythology film whose main focus is a story wrapped around special effects. A folm like CLOSE ENCOUNTERS, that uses special effects to tell the story, is a better film getting pushed to the side by kids and pop-corn, bubble-gum neophites who rather take style and explosions over substance. Many critics have cited that the blockbuster numbers STAR WARS did in 1977 may have been the first sign of the deadening of Hollywood movies. Guys like Spielberg do use special effects, yes that’s true, but as a tool to enhance-not show up. I was admired of STAR WARS as a pre-pubescent, then I grew up. Again, just my opinion. I’ll take AMARCORD any day.
Excellent excellent point there Dennis!
Star Wars was a milestone of cinema, but like The Exorcist and Jaws they form what I call the triumvirate of popcorn rollercoaster rides. Great thrills and very well made, but lifeless at heart. Their influence is massive enough for me to rate them minor milestones (unlike the terribly overrated mess that is Close Encounters), but masterpieces they aint.
As for Amarcord, don’t even go there, Fellini’s most horrendously overrated movie. Fellini made five great or nearly great films (I Vitelloni, La Strada, Nights of Cabiria, La Dolce Vita and 8½). Of the rest, I’d be more inclined to favour Juliet of the Spirits, Satyricon, The White Sheik or even Ginger and Fred over Amarcord.
RE Fish: I can’t really agree with you on the hollow-ness of popcorn fare. Are they largely rollercoaster rides, aimed at generating thrills and sensations in their audiences? I think each of the films you mention are a bit more sophisticated than that, but no question, they’re Coney Island attractions first and foremost, all of them. But many, if not most, films that are widely recognized as classics fall into that category. Lang, Hitchcock and Clouzot all made the same basic type of films as Lucas, Friedkin and Spielberg, just with a different vocabulary of conflict. If “Star Wars”, “The Exorcist” and “Jaws” aren’t true masterpieces, then neither are “M”, “Vertigo” or “Wages of Fear”.
True quality popcorn rollercoaster rides are often what become classic masterpieces, after a long enough time has passed. Just ask John Ford.
Bob, I’ve always viewed the difference between the popcorn of hitchcock, ford, ect to friedkin, lucas, and spielberg to the simple fact that they (hitchcock, ford, ect) where creating the template for the popcorn fare. that’s largely more important, then making a masterpiece of popcorn now. unless it’s great to the point that it could change how popcorn film grammar is made (i think ‘Speedracer’s cutting and movement will do this for example). spielberg fails at this as he is (or/and was) constructing films VERY traditionally (in terms of film craft i mean).
or it could just be that i’ll take a potshot at spielberg any chance i get…
Jamie, a good point, but I’d still argue that in many cases, the filmmakers of the 70’s and 80’s could quite rightly outdo the Hitchcock/Fords who established such cinematic motifs. That’s part of the charm of the whole movie-brat generation as a whole– while pioneers like Lang and Clouzot are to be rightly admired and praised for inventing the tricks of the trade, guys like Friedkin and Spielberg ought well to be recognized for refining and perfecting them. Let’s also not forget that some of them, like Lucas, did a fair amount of invention of their own.
By the way, you can feel free to bash Spielberg all you want– I’ll join in the fun by bashing the wildly overrated Hitchcock while we’re at it. Just leave Fritz Lang and George Lucas alone…
Re Clark. Serious not. We are not talking “tricks of the trade” here. Lucas and Speilberg et la are great technicians but lack even a smidgen of the intellect and artistry of the great directors you dismiss as mere ‘inventors’.
Don’t underestimate Lucas or Spielberg, Tony– granted, I don’t mean to dismiss artists like Lang or Clouzot as mere craftsmen or technical inovators. But while they owe a great deal to pictures like “Metropolis”, “Die Nibelungen” or the “Mabuse” cycle, modern marvels like “Close Encounters” or the “Star Wars” series are pioneering feats in more than just special-effects smoke and mirrors. For better or worse, they’ve directly shaped the course of moviemaking through progressively faster and more economic pacing, telling stories as quickly as possible through studied compositions and strict editing. While their work and the subsequent generation of rapid-fire cuts and widescreen panorama it inspired often lacks the patience of filmmakers past, they’ve probably done more than anyone else in opening up the imaginations of audiences and fellow directors alike. Like it or not, but without the unrestrained cinema of Lucas and Spielberg, we very likely wouldn’t have seen the same heights of ambition from guys like David Lynch, the Coen brothers or Ridley Scott. They may have closed the door on one chapter in filmmaking, but at least they opened it for a whole new generation of fantasists, too.
Oh, and by the way– Hitchcock was and is the single most overrated director to walk the earth since D.W. Griffith. Lang, Ford and Clouzot all deserve undying respect and adulation, this is true, but Hitchcock? No way, no how. If you want shallow, unintellectual popcorn fodder, look no further than the artificial shocks and scares from the so-called “Master of Suspense”. I’ll take Lucas or Spielberg’s smoke and mirrors over Hitchcok’s cheap parlor tricks any day.
There, I’ve said it, and I’m glad.
Hey Bob. You views are strongly held and I respect them.
Personally, I find Lucas, Spielberg, Lynch, and the Coens thin fare, but that’s me. We can agree on Hitchcock – old regulars at WitD will know of the vicious attacks I sustained for daring to say as much. Griffith must be given credit for the breadth of his vision and technical mastery, but he had little to say.
Tony, I appreciate your candor. And while you may find some of my favorite directors as thin fare (Lucas and Lynch– Spielberg and the Coens are hit and miss, for me) I applaud the fact that you put them all on the same level, at least. Drinks are on me.
I notice you didn’t mention Scott– do you hold his work above the others mentioned, or just forget him? Personally, I feel his best work was in the 80’s and 70’s– were this list longer, I’d have suggested “Alien” or “The Duelists” for sure. I’m not so sure about his modern work, but he continues to entertain and intrigue me.
i’m not sure how anyone can say that someone like david lynch needed lucas or spielberg… i think something like ‘eraserhead’ is getting dreamt up, then made regardless of what american shlock has come before it. tony, i hope you are not making a claim that lynch has had little to say…
i think perhaps i need to clear the beer from my brain then revisit this topic in the morning.
i will say on the ridley scott topic, his best three films are ‘blade runner’, ‘alien’ and ‘the coco chanel 5′ 30 second commercial he did around ‘77 to ‘79 (see youtube). ‘duelists’ is fairly overrated ‘barry lydon’ riffing (i will give credit where credit is due however as that was a small budget and the results on screen look great)… one must question a director when in there ‘greatest hit’s’ canon there are chanel ads… but hey, what can i say, at least he’s not tony (who claims something like ‘man on fire’ as his greatest work)…
i suppose a better break in this conversation would just be to state WHO we think are worthwhile directors and why; rather then tear down, lets build up. i will also add it’s interesting that we’ve discussed lucas and we haven’t touched his self admittance on ‘wanting to make films like THX 1138 again’ and still not (though he’s a billionaire) at what point to we admit he’s a hack? he could make ANY kind of film he desires at this point, yet he still does not. that’s incredibly curious. so tony has to be correct… lucas just has nothing to say.
and as a side note, i’d ask tony (as I know you are a fan of ‘a novel with cocaine’) if you’ve ever read dazai’s ‘no longer human’. but that’s just because i’m curious if you have, and wanting to talk literature. it has little to do with the topic at hand.
Yes Bob, I do like Ridley Scott’s 70s and 80s stuff.
Jamie, I don’t like the way Lynch says what he is saying – whatever that is
No, I haven’t read the Dazai, but I will look for it. I read Novel With Cocaine over 20 years ago, when I was a serious reader. For a good many years now I have gone off serious fiction. I now find Raymond Chandler more in keeping with my jaded outlook on things.
ah that’s fair. I’ve never read any chandler, what’s your favorite? I think you’ll really like the dazai.
The fact that Lucas has not gone out and made another “THX 1138″ frustrates me as well, but I don’t see it as evidence proving him to be a hack. He’s spent the last ten years as an incredibly productive filmmaker, and while plenty of critics and even fans may recoil at his most recent efforts, that doesn’t change the fact that they’ve been as effective and influential as they have been controversial. I’ve written about this before over at The Aspect Ratio, so I won’t bother to waste any time on it here.
I’m looking forward to his upcoming “Red Tails” production, though I desperately wish he was actually directing the damn thing himself. If there’s a reason why Lucas has receded further and further into the background of filmmaking nowadays, it’s probably because he’s tired of the constant criticism, that paired along with the memory of a stressful set with a mutinous crew on the original “Star Wars” that nearly killed him. While plenty would disagree, I’d say we’re damn lucky he came out of self-imposed exile long enough to direct the Prequels himself, and I’m glad he did. Still, I find fault with the argument that Lucas has “nothing to say” based on the fact that he hasn’t directed anything else since. Did Mallick or Kubrick have nothing to say in their decades-long absences? Did Laughton, after only one feature?
Eh. Maybe he’s like J.D. Salinger at this point, secretly making films we’ll never see until he dies. I won’t argue with you on Spielberg, a man who’s been on creative auto-pilot since the mid-90’s. He’s repeated himself often with his childlike wonder and mommy-issues. He deserves credit for breaking records as an artist and a salesman, but that doesn’t excuse how often the record skips in the same infinite loop.
RE Lynch: “Eraserhead” is a true original. There’s no question about that. But once the man picked up steam and working more steadily in the 80’s, there were some very noticeable moments where his work was influenced by Lucas, believe it or not. “Dune” would appear the most obvious example, but I’d venture to say that “Blue Velvet” is where you can really find the “Star Wars” debt– the archetypal young innocent stuck at home and looking for adventure (MacLachlan), the mysterious woman in trouble who’s full of secrets (Rosselini, and Dern, to an extent), the villainous father-figure dressed in black and aided by a breathing aparatus (Hopper) who works for a pale, soft-spoken, slightly effeminate boss (Stockwell). There’s plenty more throughout the mystical good-and-evil of “Twin Peaks”, too. Lynch may not have needed Lucas’ influence, per se, but it’s certainly there, and it’s shaped much of the classic surrealism the director has shared with the world. And by the way, as long as we’re talking about directors who frustrate us for not working when they have all the time and money they need to do so, I’d put Lynch’s name right at the top of the list, thank you very much.
I’ve been reading a lot of DeLillo lately. Mostly due to the Cronenberg “Cosmopolis” announcement, but also because he’s a favorite author of mine. Looking forward to seeing his work on the big screen.
the worth of this blog (and it’s followers) show in about 50 characters or so:
20 Picnic at Hanging Rock (Weir; Australia)
21 Céline et Julie vont en Bâteau (Rivette; France)
not many blogs around can provide an environment where the cinema art form is taken serious enough to have a following with reader’s this obscure. wonderful taste spreads like wildfire, to the 80’s!
Jamie, YOU are a major reason why the blog has reached the heights of exquisite taste! You may a terrific point there with the appearance of those particular two films, and thanks so much for the you tube!!!!
I’m not sure if you like any of the music i link to… can one like opera AND post-punk? but thanks for the enthusiasm and compliment regardless.
Of course, the placements of KILLER OF SHEEP, the Melville, the Jutra, the Herzog and the Bertolucci enhance that argument.
Let’s get a stadium wave going here people! WE’RE NUMBER ONE! WE’RE NUMBER ONE! YYYAAAYYYY!!!!!!!!
I’m still moping about Female Trouble not getting any love. But considering it was on my list while Barry Lyndon wasn’t, maybe I shouldn’t complain too much.
For me, it was difficult to choose between Manhattan and Annie Hall (I went with the latter). Likewise, it was difficult to not include Amarcord — or any Fellini for that matter — but my reasoning mirrors comments already made by others.
My thanks to everyone who had anything to do with this project — especially Sam, who got my attention — and all the voters who created such a wonderfully eclectic list.
I was truly surprised to an Aussie film make the list. Weir’s Picnic at Hanging Rock is justly revered here.
An interesting sidebar, the other great 70’s Australian film, a restored print of Wake In Fight (1971) directed by Ted Kotcheff, has been re-released theatrically. Would you believe that the original negatives had been lost and were only re-discovered recently!
Congrats on another outstanding poll. It is a daily habit I’ve had since discovering the site — coming to see which film Allan has chosen in his countdown and likely fireworks that will ensue in the comments sections!
This decade was just as much fun as the 60s and I look forward to the 80s.
As for the results, I agree that it was predictable who would take the top spot, but I think the rest of the poll is quite interesting… and also highlights a few films that I need to make it a point of seeing ASAP.
Looking over this list again, I’m actually surprised not to see “The Deer Hunter” listed. That’s too bad. When the 80’s list begins, my first reccomendation is my third favorite film of all time, next to “THX 1138″ and the “Star Wars” series– “Heaven’s Gate”. I really can’t think of a more beautiful motion picture than that, and I hope to see it up there so high, it’ll get a case of agoraphobia.
I’m happy to see Days of Heaven get into the top ten. A phenomenal film that is one of the most visually impressive films ever made and one of the most interesting narratives in film history. In all honesty I was shocked seeing it so low on Allan’s list, but again, it is HIS list. I was also disappointed to see two of my favorite 70s films get little respect on both Allan’s list and the final poll: David Lynch’s Eraserhead and Michelangelo Antonioni’s The Passenger. And I for one like seeing Star Wars and One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest high on the poll result. These two films get written off as overrated so often with die hard film enthusiasts, that I think they’re underrated. I’m not shocked that the two Godfathers took the top two spots mainly because…well they’re the Godfathers. Though I wouldn’t label them as the crowning achievements of 70s cinema, or even Francis Ford Coppola’s crowning achievement of the decade (Apocalyse Now and The Conversation), but its hard to deny the the two film’s epic status. And finally am I the only one who thinks John Cassavetes has not been represented very well on the past three decades polls and countdowns. The man’s directorial debut, Shadows, in 50s brought forth a vision that revolutionized cinema. In the 60s, his film Faces was probably one the most realistic portraits of sexual and marital frustration captured on celluloid. And in the 70s, he delivered his magnum opus with A Woman Under The Influence. Any thoughts? Well looking forward to the next decade.
good call on cassavetes… i really thought Allan would pick ‘Husbands’ very hihg as a darkhorse. I think it’s his masterpiece (one of about 5 he made) that never gets any discussion.
oh well, supposedly it’s getting DVD release soon, that will mean instant status, it’s fantastic– just under seen.
Hi! Sam Juliano, Allan, Angelo D’Arminio Jr., Tony, and Wonders in the Dark readers,
Congratulation! félicitations! on another successful
poll, but Let me just “echo” what the other WitD commenter have all ready expressed…the top winning choices were not unexpected, but it was also great for me to view so many unknown films for the first time.
Oh! Yeah, I ‘am really looking forward to the 80s poll and my visits to Netflix and Amazon.com. In demand.
I bet the proprietors, of Netflix and Amazon.com. In demand…are looking forward to my visits too!
Merci,
Thanks,
DeeDee
DeeDee just saw ‘the prowler’ (1951; directed joseph losey) in chicago’s noir city marathon… WOW.
ever seen it?
ever since i saw it i’ve been hot to trot for any copy of it… it you can direct me… it’s never been released on DVD or even VHS as far as i’ve read. people online claim to can dvd-/+r’s but i can’t locate.
The Prowler was restored by the Film Noir Foundation last year. It has been on TCM and is available as a DivX…
DeeDee,
I am sure we all feel that your comments are quite welcome and we appreciate all the input from everyone.
THE 80’s TAB IS UP FOLKS!!!!!!!!!!!!
I have already entered my 80’s list, which all and any of you are welcome to proceed with. Allan’s nearlies will be posted tomorrow, and his magnificent countdown will begin on Tuesday.
I listed my Top 50, which any of you are also welcome to do, but as always only the Top 25 will receive points.
Bob Clark, your long comments above have been enthralling. They are most welcome here!!! Thank you sir!
Well, as always, Allan makes good points. But while I understand where he’s going with his “triumverate”, I whole-heartedly disagree with his relegating films like THE EXORCIST and JAWS as hollow. Each of these two films has a moral center to them. JAWS is a masterful tale of different outlooks coming together to thwart an almost impossible oddity, while THE EXORCIST, at its core is a look at an individuals despair due to his loss of religious and spiritual faith. Do these themes sound hollow? No, they don’t. As for CLOSE ENCOUNTERS: It is a better filnm than STAR WARS, critically well-if not spectacularly-received, and far more engrossing from both an entertainment and metaphysical point of view. The performances are terrific, unlike the wooden ones in STAR WARS and the special effects far more convincing. It is far from a mess.
As for AMARCORD; I’m not saying its a masterpiece. I’m not saying its Fellini’s best film. What I AM saying its a movie I prefer over something like STAR WARS and it happens to be a film I LIKE. In any case: I’D RATHER TAKE A BAD DAY WITH FEDERICO FELLINI THAN A GOOD DAY WITH GEORGE LUCAS. That’s all.
Jaws, The Exorcist and Star Wars are not messes, they’re excellent milestones of cinema, but have no depth, they’re thrill rides…excellent thrill rides, but still mere thrill rides.
I didn’t say THE EXORCIST or JAWS were messes and I didn’t allude that you said they were. You said CLOSE ENCOUNTERS was a mess and my answer to that statement was that it was a superior film to STAR WARS, garnered terrific notices from film critics and was FAR from the mess you said it was. I was disagreeing with you, but POLITELY disagreeing with you. Nuff said on this. Enjoy your weekend Allan.
Hi! Jamie,
Jamie said, “DeeDee just saw ‘the prowler’ (1951; directed joseph losey) in chicago’s noir city marathon… WOW.
ever seen it? …”
Oh! No, Jamie, I have never watched Joseph Losey’s 1951 film The Prowler before…
…ever since i saw it i’ve been hot to trot for any copy of it… it you can direct me… it’s never been released on DVD or even VHS as far as i’ve read. people online claim to can dvd-/+r’s but i can’t locate.
…Sure, if you like just send Sam Juliano, your address and I will be sure to send a copy on to Sam Juliano, and he in turn will send the copy on to you. Or you can just email me at my former user name
darkcitydame4e@gmail.com…and I will be sure to send a copy on to you.
By the way, this film is a very rarely aired on television, but if what Tony, said, is true about TCM airing this film then I’ am quite sure that one of the four film noir aficionados that I trade with will have a pretty decent copy of this film.
(Since this film is considered a film noir they (film noir collectors) usually, have this film on their list.
However, you have to be mindful of the fact, that this film is very rarely aired on television; therefore, it is sometimes difficult for traders to upgrade copies of this film.
Tony said, “The Film Noir Foundation restored the Prowler last year.”
Oh! Yes, Tony that is true…and figuratively speaking, while keeping my ear to the ground…
…I overheard from another film noir aficionado “lips”…That the 1950 film The Breaking Point (According to author Spencer Selby, is a more faithful, distinguished adaptation of Hemingway’s novel To Have and Have not.) starring John Garfield, and Patricia Neal may be release on DVD next year or the following year.
This is great news…considered that it might not be screened again on the big screen after it screening in Chicago.
DeeDee
Angelo D’Arminio Jr. said, “DeeDee, I am sure we all feel that your comments are quite welcome….”
Why Thank-you, kindly,…Wonders in the Dark “Tabulator extraordinaire” Angelo D’Arminio Jr.
DeeDee
Hey, what about “Dressed to Kill?” Can’t go wrong with DePalma.
Well, there was “Mission to Mars” but nobody’s perfect.