by Sam Juliano
As we inch closer to the dog days of summer, those of us in the NYC area can be thankful for the 70 degree weather we have enjoyed now for weeks, intersperced with some rain. Here at WitD, the 70’s countdown moves closer to the top 10 of Allan’s listing, and one of the post this week expectantly led all others with most hits and more significantly the highest number of comments, 53. That post of course was The Godfather, and it inspired an enthralling thread. The review in the ‘Forsaken 70’s Cinema’ series on John Waters’s Female Trouble, was next up with a whopping 44 comments. (The totals for the popular ‘Monday Morning Diary’ are not included).
Lucille and I attended a fabulous concert at Avery Fisher Hall on the last day (Friday, July 10) of the ‘Summertime Classics’ series, performed by the New York Philharmonic and a guest conductor, who this night also served as host: Bramwell Tovey. The classical venue, titled “Bolero and Other French Delights” included a fantastic performance of the Ravel masterpiece (a work that seems to be known by everyone, regardless of whether they are music fans) as well as selections from Bizet’s Carmen (including “March of the Toreodors” and the “Habanera”) and from Saint-Saens’s Samson and Dalila, including of course the work’s most sublime passage, one of opera’s greatest arias, “Mon coeur s’ouvre a ta voix.” Also included were Berlioz’s “La Corsaire Overture” and three encores of works by Cilea and Massenet. The soprano Denys Graves brought the house down with her singing, and the Philharmonic were in top form. A review will definitely appear at WitD later this week.
On the theatrical movie scene I saw the following:
The Hurt Locker **** 1/2 (Saturday night; Montclair Cinemas)
Bruno ** (Sunday afternoon; Edgewater multiplex)
Soul Power *** (Sunday night; Landmark Cinemas)
THE HURT LOCKER by Kathryn Bigelow is one of the best war films in years and it deserves the spectacular reviews it has received. It’s set in Iraq, and it chronicles the daily life within a bomb disposal unit, identifying improvised explosive devices. They either deactivate them or blow them up. The film is riveting, provocative and imbued with a human quality to the characters. Bigelow makes no political judgement here, just a consideration of war, which is in tune with the slew of anti-war films over the years, but this one is unique.
BRUNO starring Sacha Baron Cohen domonstrates that this humor has now worn out its welcome. Some scenes, like the appearance of Presidential candidate Ron Paul in a hotel room, and the improvising of a “blow job” as well as the final scene in a wrestling ring are very funny, but so much of the longish 90 minute running time is occupied by lazy humor, over the top insults, and some anal gadgetry that left one shaking their head. To say it’s insulting in one manner or another is to miss the whole point of the focus, but by and large it just isn’t very funny, and that’s the bottom line.
SOUL POWER is a documentary about “Zaire 74” the music festival combined with the landmark boxing event “Rumble in the Jungle” which is basically an encore of When We Were Kings. This film was basically comprised of stock footage, and had little by way of filmmaking inspiration. The Ali bits were more of a hinderance than any kind of a worthwhile embellishment.
I watched two DVDs this week from Allan’s backlog, and both were excellent: Rossellini’s ravishing THE AGE OF THE MEDICI from the Eclipse set, and a French satire with black humor from the 50’s titled THE RED INN.
So, what have YOU seen? Listened to? Attended? Experienced?
Agree with you on both Hurt Locker and Bruno, Sam. I’m not quite as crazy about Hurt Locker as you…the business with the little kid didn’t really work for me…but it’s still terrific.
Bruno was a waste of time, neither funny nor successful as social critique.
The big surprise for me this weekend was Whatever Works. I was in exactly the right misanthropic mood for it and it worked on my like gangbusters. I went into it in a foul mood and came out with a smile. I see the critical response to it has been pretty dismal which surprises me. If you must rank them, it’s fair to say this is minor Allen, but so what? It was funny which is a lot more than you can say about Bruno.
Indeed Craig, it is minor Allen, but like you I did laugh and have a good time. David was wonderful. It was on balance far funnier than BRUNO, which did have it’s moments though. I am no fan of Kathryn Bigelow, but by golly she has crafted an excellent film here. I understand what you are saying there about th elittle kid though. Thanks very much Craig!
Well, never mind what I have watched, far too boring, but tomorrow is the 220th anniversary of the storming of the Bastille and as part of the 14th July celebrations I will be watching Gance’s Napoleon (Brownlow edit) tomorrow night. I haven’t watched it for several years, but on any 10th anniversary multiple, it should be done.
In the theater, I saw “Public Enemies”, liked it a lot but it falls short of being great. For me, Mann’s best film remains “Collateral.” As with most of his films, I found this sometimes a little too stylized. Depp is good and captured Dillinger’s smirk that he seems to wear in some photos.
I also watched “I Could Never Be Your Woman”, not one of Amy Heckerling’s better films, “Ossessione”, which I just posted an article on 24frames, certainly the best of the three versions of Cain’s novel that I have seen and “The Friends of Eddie Coyle” which I will be posting an article on later in the week.
Saw ‘Bruno’ on Saturday and found it kinda lame. I concur that there were a few scenes that worked, but it was always was straining, and there was more filler than there was in ‘Borat.’ The simulated blow job scene was the funniest in the film. You can only go so far with this material, and when it’s exhausted it becomes redundent.
I watched ‘Monty Python and the Holy Grail’ and Hitchcock’s ‘Lifeboat’ on DVD. I had already seen both over time, but always a pleasure to revisit. It’s amazing what Hitchcock did with the set, never moving his camera. Talllulah Bankhead is best of the actors.
You really make ‘The Hurt Locker’ enticing. I see it’s gone local now.
The weather has really been something. I caught up with two films that were on my list, “Whatever Works” and “Moon”. As I recall, your review of Woody Allen’s newest film was favorable, and I enjoyed it too. It’s no kind of masterpiece, and not as great as “Vicky Cristina Barcelona” but it seemed to recapture some of the old spark. “Moon” was an excrutiating bore. We’ve seen this material before, and it’s been done better. I have no issue with Sam Rockwell, who played the lead. I know you liked the music, but I didn’t find that special.
DVDs were my method of film-watching this week, but I can’t say I wasn’t tempted to see ‘Bruno.’ Too bad it didn’t match the earlier effort.
Masque of the Red Death—reminded me of ‘The Seventh Seal’, as it was comparable philosophically, and that cinematography by Nicholas Roeg was stunning.
White Zombie–the non-verbal passages brought ‘Vampyr’ to mind. Lugosi gives one of his best performances, and some of the imagery is mesmerizing. Some seems are dull too.
Horse Feathers–I am always drawn back to this one. It’s my favorite Marx Brothers film of all.
You were right about ICE AGE 3. The writing was dull and the animation was unremarkable. I’m surprised it’s doing so well at the box-office, even if animation usually scores.
saw ‘Bruno’ and ‘Whatever Works’ this week in the theater. liked both, apparently more then most around here.
on DVD watched the new criterion ‘The Friends of Eddie Coyle’, i had only seen that on an old VHS as a kid. really like it; and the transfer is excellent–save for a few moments of 70’s era music that film can almost pass for American Melville.
since i was on a peter yates kick after that i also watched ‘John and Mary’, which I liked overall. would like to see a contemporary update of the interesting premise.
all the thinking of Yates (‘Bullitt’ and ‘Mother, Jugs, and Speed’) led me to think about other car chase films (plus an article in Slant about the top ten stunt man movies) got me thinking (and watching) Walter Hill’s ‘The Driver’. I loved the movie as an adolescent, (and still do mind you) but the cops didn’t illicit so much laughter from me before. the action scenes i still marvel at, and I never realized as a youngster (perhaps because it was unseen by my younger eyes) how much the films opening few scenes ape ‘Le Samourai’.
after talking last time about my love for ‘A Face of Another’, and having Sam assert ‘Woman in the Dunes’ as his favorite, I rewatched that too. Had forgotten the absolute brilliance there. I may have to rethink the order in which I recommend those films–I also assume ‘Pitfall’ will be watched this next week. ‘Woman and the Dunes’ did something fresh to me this time as literally weeks ago I finished (for the second or third time) Camus’ ‘The Myth of Sisyphus’, the similarities are endless and unmistakable.
listening has been the entire catalog of british new wavers XTC. I think ‘all you pretty girls’ is my favorite song (from 1984’s ‘The Big Express’), with ‘Black Sea’ (1980) being my favorite album. I seem to like the albums from the first half of the eighties the most. It’s all pretty great though– in this posters opinion as great a pop band as england (or anywhere) ever produced (beatles included).
reading remains, the last bit of ‘Novel with Cocaine’ (which I can not recommend higher), and Pinker’s ‘The Blank Slate’ which should take quite a while as it’s quite an exhaustive study.
………Bruno wasn’t so bad. Borat was better, yes, but there were some hysterical scenes, like that whole business with the pastor trying to convert him to being straight………
I seemed to be in line with Ebert on this one: ” “Bruno” is a no-holds-barred comedy permitting several holds I had not dreamed of. The needle on my internal Laugh Meter went haywire, bouncing among hilarity, appreciation, shock, admiration, disgust, disbelief and appalled incredulity. Here is a film that is 82 minutes long and doesn’t contain 30 boring seconds.”
can’t wait for the deleted scenes…. comedy that almost provokes an actual riot, how can anyone say nay? seriously?
Too bad about “Soul Power.” I was lookly forward to that one. I must stand with you on “The Hurt Locker.” This concerned a different aspect of war, and there was a depth to the characters rarely on display in this type of film. I liked “Collateral” too, as well as “Strange Days” from Bigelow.
Hi! Sam Juliano, and WitD readers,
I’ am surprised that the film The Taking of Pelham 123 did not fare very well, when it comes to ratings…
…However, I should not be surprised…because after listening to Eric, and his brother Scott, on their podcast very negative critique of Tony Scott’s film The Taking of Pelham 123…they left no doubt that this film…“pardom me” sucked!
Oh! Well, I guess because a film has action does not necessarily mean that it will fare well at the box-office.
I’am not quite sure about the Taking of Pelham 123 film box-office intake.
DeeDee 😉
Speaking of the scene in Bruno with the “turned-straight” pastor, I found it quite poignant, actually. I felt rather sad for the guy.
It’s funny you saw “Soul Power” this past weekend, as I watched the dvd of “Cadillac Records” which I thought was a nice evocation of the time and the music. I hope you at least appreciated the segments with B.B. King. He’s no Muddy Waters, but I still love his rendition of “The Thrill is Gone”.
As far as “Bruno” I’m not sure I’ll bother, but the war film is a certainty.
I think “Pelham 1-2-3” did well at the box-office, but I’ll wait to hear from Sam, Dee Dee.
John: I haven’t yet seen that Heckerling film you being to the table here! I will have to remedy that soon. I must say I completely agree with you on what you object to with PUBLIC ENEMIES with the emphasis on ‘style.’ But you seem to have like dit overall more than I did, which is fair enough. Most viewers and critics are imprssed with Depp as well.
I will soon be looking at your OBSESSIONE review! I’m sure you have done a magnificent job, without even reading it yet. I was not a big fan of EDDIE COYLE, but it’s been decades since I saw it, so I’ll need another viewing.
Joe: That’s a great choice there with the Hitchcock! I always remember the flowing newspaper with Hitch’s photograph, where he made his trademark cameo! As far as MONTY PYTON, well, that never gets tiring! Of course, we are on the same page with BRUNO. Two weeks from now you’ll completely forget about it, if you haven’t already.
Frank G: I am with you for good and for bad on those two films you saw! WHATEVER WORKS was a lot of fun.
David: Three interesting choices there! RED DEATH and HORSE FATHERS are two of my favorites!
Maria: Too bad you had to learn the hard way so to speak. I fully agree.
Jamie: Sorry to say I am unfamiliar with those songs you mentioned near the end of your report, but I bet Jon knows them well!
The thread seems to be mostly in favor of the Woodman’s new film, even if BRUNO is problematic with most. But I’m glad Sacha Baron Cohen’s film worked for you; it seems to have the majority on board.
As I mentioned on the prvious comment to John, I never cared for EDDIE COYLE, but that was a number of years ago; I do need to look at this new Criterion edition. I like JOHN AND MARY well enough, though.
I’m sure you will find PITFALL most interesting!!! I am happy at hearing of this re-assessment of WOMAN IN THE DUNES.
Thanks John and Frank A. for your typical, much valued contributions.
Pierre: There no doubt there was ‘poignancy’ in those pastor scenes! Fine point!
Peter: PELHAM didn’t break ant records, but it did well enough.
Dee Dee: The original THE TAKING OF PELHAM 1-2-3 is btter than this re-make.
I saw The Hurt Locker and Bruno as well, and would agree with both of your star ratings, except perhaps one half-star less for The Hurt Locker. I’m still ruminating on it as I write some thoughts out, but all in all I think it will remain at least in the top 15 movies I see this year. I had a few troubles with it that I will shamelessly copy from my comment at LiC:
“Definitely from an acting and technical production standpoint it has to be considered among the year’s best to date (which may not be saying much, actually). I would give it an A instead of an A+, though, for being just on the verge of predictable.
***SPOILER WARNING***For example, it was pretty clear throughout that James was going to make it through in pretty good shape. Everybody else was fair game (and I was actually surprised Sanborn and Eldridge survived; that desert shootout was terrifying), but when your bomb defuser is seemingly invincible, well it takes the suspense down from debilitating to “just” unbearable. In other words, this was still the most tense movie I’ve seen since United 93. Beyond that, I wasn’t too fond of three things toward the end: a.) the shooting/fiasco with Eldridge helped establish James’ character a little further, but it was almost a cheap way to get Eldridge’s character out of the story, or so I felt; b.) I didn’t like Sanborn’s plaintive monologue – it just felt too obvious on their last or second to last trip out, and c.) I didn’t like how the “days left” number was really just a build-up the whole time for that totally-see-it-coming punchline/climax/final shot.***END SPOILER***”
Also, here is an interesting article I found about what actual military personnel think of the film: http://www.army.mil/-news/2009/07/07/23959-eod-soldiers-view-the-hurt-locker/
Regarding Bruno, well there isn’t much to be said that Sam hasn’t already touched on. It was funny for moments, but my guess is that, ironically, Sacha Baron Cohen could be a lot funnier if he took himself more seriously.
Soul Power arrives in a few weeks, Sam, and I’ll keep your lukewarm thoughts in mind. It looked to me to be about exactly what you describe.
Dan, nothing at all shameless about copying that superlative comment! We are happy to have it here! I don’t have the problems you have chronicled here, but I respect them.
I will now click on the military link you so graciously provided!
You have done a bang-up job yourself with the BRUNO analysis, and have listed the moments in the film that WERE funny.
Too bad about SOUL POWER though Dan, as I have loved these artists throughout my life.
interesting article, Dan.
Well, most of the soldiers feel many of the depictions were inaccurate, even if the majority admitted they would recommend it, and that’s it’s “entertaining.” This is usually the position the military takes in evalusating a number of war films, but its no less significant.
Great that Jamie has expanded the focus here and included books.
M. Ageyev’s Novel With Cocaine for me is one of the greatest novels of the 20th century. A fascinating story of youthful alienation and the descent into addiction during the maelstrom of the Russian revolution, the book and the mystery that surrounds it, cries out for a film treatment.
This is the frontispiece from my copy of the book: “M. Ageyev is a mysterious figure – not much is known about him, not even if Ageyev is his real name. He left Russia soon after the Revolution, and was then seen in Germany. He is believed to have spent some time in an asylum in Istanbul, but since these brief sightings nothing has been seen or heard of him. Novel with Cocaine is his only known work, and first appeared amongst the Russian emigre community in Paris in the early Thirties.”
I have been re-reading Hammett’s The Maltese Falcon for the umpteenth time and still find it engrossing. It is amazing how strongly the movie informs my reading of the book. Each character in my mind’s eye and each line of dialog play out as they do in the film.
I have also been flipping though David Thomson’s Have You Seen…?, which I reviewed on Another Cinema Blog and found wanting, though I did find his piece on Taxi Driver interesting and well- written. Thomson allocates a page for each movie giving him 600-800 words to play with. There are no images. The films are presented alphabetically and cover a wide range, with a strong bias for Hollywood product. The dustcover describes the contents as “including masterpieces, oddities, guilty pleasures, and classics (with just a few disasters)”. The marketing hype tells me the book is “a sweeping collection [presenting] films that Thomson offers in response to the question… ‘What should I see?’ “. Sadly, for me the reviews are too self-consciously quirky and overly striving for knowing irony to be of any real assistance in their stated aim. I suppose you can put it down to dry English wit for it own sake. The short essays are full of arcane references for those cineastes who live for such trivia, and there is nothing wrong with that! But when you only have a page at your disposal, such indulgence costs. And the cost is high. After reading a review, if you have not seen the film, there is at bottom very little to inform your decision of whether to pursue it. If you have seen the movie, more often than not, you are left perplexed by the flippant tone and neglect of important elements. As his bias is obvious I suppose it is to a degree acceptable. Though to my mind, this makes his survey rather limiting. For example, he writes-off the Marx Bros as mere vaudeville, refers to film noir as a “style looking for content”, and barely tolerates Billy Wilder.
Last week was for encores. As well as Port of Shadows, I watched The Killer That Stalked New York (1950), Preminger’s noir, Laura (1944), and the original The Taking of Pelham 123 (1974).
The Killer That Stalked New York is a b-noir from a director who made only three movies in the early 50s, Earl McEvoy. The movie was lensed by Joe Biroc and stars the under-rated Evelyn Keyes, who passed away last year, and appeared to advantage in Joseph Losey’s The Prowler (1951) and Robert Rossen’s Johnny O’Clock (1947). Keyes plays an accomplice to a hood, who after a job in Cuba, returns to NYC with smallpox, in a dramatisation of the New York smallpox scare of 1946. Keyes is brilliant as ‘the killer’ and dominates the film, which in the light of the current swine flu scare, is a well-crafted doco-drama which deftly weaves the drama of the woman’s noir story and how a city of over 8 million people has to mobilise to deal with such a threat, with vignettes on how the illness is transmitted, and a continuing story arc of the fate of the killer’s first ‘victim’, a young working-class girl. An interesting segue is how these old Hollywood b-pictures weaved wonderful vignettes and comic moments into the story. Two such scenes stand out in this movie. A milkman is infected and there is a scene in the sick man’s bedroom when the inoculation team visits. The poor guy’s persona is eloquently evoked by his wife’s harping but deeply loving commentary on her husband – before she realises the gravity of his illness. The other scene harks back to the discussion on films about children in the thread for Allan’s review of The Spirit of the Beehive. Cut to a Brooklyn street with kids playing on the road in front of a bar. The kids scramble as a police car pulls up. They gather on the footpath to check it out. As a burly detective steps out of the car, one kid pipes up and asks for the low-down “Hey Bub…”. The cop replies “Beat it kid.” The bar is closed so the cops after getting the form from the kids, drive off, and the kids jump back on the road shooting air tommy guns after the car. They don’t make movies like that any more.
Laura is elegant noir melodrama. Gene Tierney is an exquisite iridescent angel and Dana Andrews a stolid cop who nails the killer after falling for a dead dame. Clifton Webb as the homme-fatale is his annoying best.
The Taking of Pelham 123 (1974) is great entertainment, with a surreal mix of humor and violence, and a noirish denouement. Check out Walter Matthau’s loud check shirt and yellow tie.
Tony: My apologies for not engaging you sooner, but there was unrelenting action on that other thread that barely allowed me to breathe. Not that I’m complaining.
The Taking of Pelham 1-2-3 is most entertaining, and I loved Matthau and those oriental guys! It was far btter than the re-make, which lacked the campy humor of the original.
Laura is of course an exquisite film that lends itself to endless revisits. I like what you say about Clifton Webb! It certainly makes a strong claim to be Preminger’s greatest film.
The Killer That Stalked New York? Well, Dee Dee has alerted me to the availability and after this fantastic mini-review, which could very well have been posted here as a separate review, I am very interested. I believe you had mentioned at FilmsNoir that Evelyn Keyes has passed on. Trenchant observation there with the swine-flu parallel, and the connection to the discussion under Allan’s The Spirit of the Beehive review.
Thomson is really atough critic to figure. I always wa srather annoyed that he regularly trashed films by John Ford and Stanley Kubrick, but there are so many other instances where I say to myself: “he just doesn’t get it.” I can see why that volume would yield some frustration, and I pretty much agree, although with you its more an aversion to his quirky style than it is for his summary judjements.
I own the Library of American HC volume on Hammett, and I have read THE MALTESE FALCON once and agree its a literary masterpiece. What with you passion for this genre, I am neither surprised by what you say nor by the revelation of your re-readings. But it is truly great and warrants all that affection.
I agree that BOOKS should be talked about on this thread and I’m sure that will be in the future. I am astounded by the reputation of NOVEL WITH COCAINE!!
I can easily be accused of ass-kissing, but I dare say this wa sth emost thorough and engaging submission at this thread since its inception, and it was by one of WitD’s writers to boot!
Sam – your thoughts on THE HURT LOCKER have shot that film to the top of my “must see” list. Hopefully I will find the time!
I had a strange weekend in the City (that included Bruno and a sassy bus drive)…you can read about here:
http://davethenovelist.wordpress.com/2009/07/12/do-not-make-me-stop-this-bus/
Sam – your thoughts on THE HURT LOCKER have shot that film to the top of my “must see” list. Hopefully I will find the time!
I had a strange weekend in the City that included Bruno and a sassy bus driver you can read about here:
http://davethenovelist.wordpress.com/2009/07/12/do-not-make-me-stop-this-bus/
I just responded to you David!!!! Fantastic post that I urge all WitD readers to check out!!!!
Tony’s submission above is one for the ages. I will save a full and comprehensive embellishment tomorrow, but …wow!
Most of my viewing has been catching up with movies I’ve missed for my own countdown I have going, but over the weekend I was able to see a couple of “new” films (meaning new in the sense of my seeing them for the first time). One was a new release, another from last year, and one classic.
– Public Enemies – 7/10 (I thought Depp was excellent as Dillinger, but on the whole this was just OK or good for me. I was just expecting or hope for something more. So I liked it, but was a little letdown.)
– Gran Torino – 8/10 (I enjoyed it, which I didn’t really expect to. I don’t really even want to over-analyze it. Maybe it is at times cheesy or over the top, but it was entertaining, which hit the spot for me.)
– The Steel Helmet (I had never seen this until yesterday… and what the heck was I waiting for! A truly great war film and quite easily my favorite that I have seen from Samuel Fuller.)
Dave: As you know I am with you on PUBLIC ENEMIES. You said it perfectly! GRAN TORINO I liked less than you, maybe a 5/10 for me. But you are not the only one to feel this way. THE STEEL HELMUT on the other hand is a very great film! It’s wonderful to hear what you say here! have you seen Fuller’s WHITE DOG yet if I might ask?
Oh, and forgot to add that if I was rating The Steel Helmet, it would be 9/10.
I just finished the only Ian McEwan novel I have yet to read: Enduring Love. It felt good to escape with a book this weekend and give the movie-watching a rest…nothing out there I really wanted to see anyway (The Hurt Locker hasn’t made it to where I live yet).
Has anyone seen the film version of Enduring Love with pre-Bond Daniel Craig? I’m betting it’s bollocks compared to the book as McEwan is extremely difficult to adapt (see Atonement).
that should read: McEwan novel I had yet to read. I finally finished them all is what I was implying. He’s probably the greatest English writer of the last 10 years (Amis and Rushdie have been hit and miss during the last decade). What do you all think about McEwan? I think he’s highly intelligent, yet extremely accessible. A rare combo, to be sure.
Kevin: I have only read ATONEMENT of all his novels, and only because I was a fanatical adherent of the film. But the book is a near-masterpiece, and he has quite a style there!
Sam, re: the military article. I agree that their reaction is on par with what most have said about other war movies (Saving Private Ryan, et. al.), but in the case of The Hurt Locker, well I think it’s fair to say that Bigelow was attempting to show the most “realistic” portrayal yet of the soldiers’ work in Iraq. Certainly the on-the-ground tension and paralyzing paranoia appeared legitimate to me, but presenting her main character as a rebellious renegade threatened to nullify the specific realism she was trying to portray. I just can’t for the life of me (and the military guys confirmed) believe that a soldier could act out so independently, against direct orders.
Made for great drama, but if that’s how our military is actually functioning then we’re probably in a lot more trouble than we even realize.
Daniel, that is indeed a telling clarification, as is that closing lamentation. How true!
This comment is being reposted from yesterday…
…Due to the fact, that WordPress logged me out automatically.Therefore, Allan, the original comment a waiting moderation can be discarded.
Hi! Tony,
What a very interesting comment that you have posted here about the novel and film The Maltese Falcon… and not because you, mentioned author Dashiell Hammett book The Maltese Falcon.
Tony said,” I have been re-reading Hammett’s The Maltese Falcon for the umpteenth time and still find it engrossing. It is amazing how strongly the movie informs my reading of the book. Each character in my mind’s eye and each line of dialog play out as they do in the film.
I’ am not sure, but I think that I read (John) Huston had his secretary write the script “almost” verbatim from (“The” Dashiell”) Hammett’s book.(Here it goes read it and…. http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/Maltese_Falcon.pdf
Speaking of books, are you, familiar with author Richard Layman, Discovering The Maltese Falcon and Sam Spade:The Evolution of Dashiell Hammett’s Masterpiece, Including John Huston’s Movie with Humphrey Bogart (The Ace Performer Collection series).
(Oh! No!…that is all I need is another copy of the film
The Maltese Falcon.)…In his
“New book author Richard Layman, reveals discoveries about The Maltese Falcon, Dashiell Hammett, and detective Sam Spade Hammett expert Richard Layman packs Discovering The Maltese Falcon and Sam Spade with hundreds of unexpected delights, says Los Angeles Times
This richly illustrated new paperback edited by Richard Layman, Discovering The Maltese Falcon and Sam Spade, uncovers from institutional and…Cont”
DeeDee 😉
Dee Dee:
Have you actually finished reading THE MALTESE FALCON at this point? I am unfamiliar with Layman though.
Hi! Tony,
Tony said,” I have been re-reading Hammett’s The Maltese Falcon for the umpteenth time and still find it engrossing…
…”It is amazing how strongly the movie informs my reading of the book. Each character in my mind’s eye and each line of dialog play out as they do in the film.”
Tony, now you can do a side-by-side comparison since you own the book. (With the script from the 1941 film The Maltese Falcon that I have linked here…)
…By the way, is this your first time viewing director John Huston’s 1941 script for the film The Maltese Falcon? … Because I do not own the book yet, Therefore, I’ am unable to do a side-by-side comparison, but do I plan to throw the book into my cart…in order to do a side-by-side comparison?
You betcha!
Take care!
DeeDee 😉
Dee Dee: I think this is Tony’s first time with the script, but not the novel. I will leave him to respond though.
Tony,
The one slight difference that I did notice is the ending…the script ends with actor Humphrey Bogart,
in his office. Whereas, in the film…he walk slowly
down the stairs.Therefore, I must read the script in it
entirety to see if I can “discover” any other changes.(Since I never read the book, Therefore, I don’t know how author Dashiell Hammett’s book ends.)
Clarification:
What a very interesting comment that you have posted here about the novel and film The Maltese Falcon, but that isn’t the only reason that your comment is interesting.(I think your comment overall…is very interesting too!)
Thanks, for sharing!
DeeDee 😉
Dee Dee:
I just got finished saying above how tryly great Tony’s entire posting here is. His lifelong passion for Hammett’s great fiction shines through, and his coverage of the films he saw was really something! The report on THE KILLER THAT STALKED NEW YORK was particularly fantastic!
Thanks Dee Dee and Sam for your generous responses.
Dee Dee, I have been looking for a copy of the script for ages – so many many thanks! You have wisely picked up on the very important departure from the novel in the ending, and I know I have read something very interesting on this – I just can’t remember exactly where at the moment (I AM getting old!). I will find it now and post details here soonest.
Dee Dee, this is from the introduction to The Encyclopedia of Film noir (2007) by Geoff Mayer:
“[Huston’s film and the 1931 version do not end] by replicating the novel’s nihilism, whereby Hammett concludes his story by suggesting that Spade is about to resume his affair with Iva Archer, the wife of his dead partner. On the other hand, both films conclude with Spade’s torment at having to hand the woman he loves over to the police. The most obvious difference is the degree of Spade’s inner torment and emotional vulnerability that is most evident in the 1941 film compared to the novel… While the novel emphasizes Spade’s self-interest, his desire to survive, as the prime reason for handing Brigid over to the police, Huston’s film depicts a tormented detective trying to stay within the bounds of conventional morality by rejecting the temptations offered by an attractive, but ruthless, woman.
Hammett, on the other hand, emphasizes Spade’s determination to survive when he writes, “One of us has got to take it, after the talking those birds [Cairo and Gutman] will do. They’d hang me for sure. You’re likely to get a better break” Huston omits this passage from the film, as he does Spade’s equivocation as to whether he really loves Brigid. After Brigid tells him that he should know whether he loves her, Hammett’s Spade replies, “I don’t. It’s easy enough to be nuts about you.” He looked hungrily from her hair to her feet and up to her eyes again. “But I don’t know what that amounts to. Does anybody ever? But suppose I do? What of it? Maybe next month I won’t. I’ve been through it before—when it lasted that long. Then what?”
Huston replaces Hammett’s cynicism with a more romantic gesture from Spade as he tells Brigid, “Maybe I do [love you].” While Ricardo Cortez’s Spade in 1931 is more or less resigned to handing Wonderly over to the police, Huston extends this sequence by accentuating the psychological disturbance within the detective. His torment is palpable, especially when he shouts into her face that “I won’t [fall for you] because all of me wants to, regardless of the consequences.” While this is not an existential moment, as some claim, it does represent a significant moment in the development of film noir. Unlike the novel, where survival is all that matters to the detective, Spade’s torment in the 1941 film nearly destroys him.
As great as Huston’s film is Tony, it appears you feel that Hammett’s novel is infinitely better, no? Fascinating observations here if I may say so myself.
Sam, I think the novel and the movie are so inextricably linked for me now that they are two sides of the same coin…
I can well understand that for sure.
Sam:
I highly recommend Saturday. It’s arguably the best post-September 11th novel written as it deals with issues that continue to swirl around us today. The opening images of the novel are haunting — and the final 100 pages can easily be read in about an hour, it just flies. The book is a masterpiece. It sounds like they are getting ready to adapt that one, too.
I liked Wright’s adaptation of Atonement visually — and for that I placed the film in my top 10 of that year. The opening scenes in the house are fantastic, but I always knew once Robbie went off to the war that the film was going to have trouble telling its story in the same, exciting way that novel does (especially with the trick McEwan plays at the end of the novel which only works with words…I didn’t think any director could make that ending work , and Wright tries his hardest, but it ultimately fails).
Anyway — Saturday — I hope you pick it up some day, Sam. It rivals Rushdie’s Shalimar the Clown as the best novel of the 2000’s.
Kevin: You have REALLY made SATURDAY appealing there! I will have to get this. And if a film is forthcoming that is further excitement. As far as ATONEMENT, as you know I praised that to the heavens. You have a good point there about the change in tone and setting, but I still thought that Dunkirk sequence at the amusement park was stunning and magnificent. And Marianelli’s ravishing score accentauted the stop-dead lyricism of that extended moment. Then of course there’s Vanessa redgrave’s master class gig at the end!
But yes, I must read SATURDAY!
I enjoyed the Dunkirk scene, too, although, I felt like it went away from McEwan’s vision of the whole “war” story in his novel (which was that he didn’t want a traditional war novel, he wanted it to be about the journey to the beach…). As an isolated moment — I think the Dunkirk scene is fantastic, although like the extended shot in Children of Men I think it calls a little too much attention to itself…but damn, it’s beautiful to look at.
And yes, the score in Atonement is fantastic. The use of the typewriter is a clever and subtle hint to what is really going on in the film.
Kevin: You have fully grasped everything here. There isn’t much more I can add here, nor dispute. Although the film received generally solid reviews and it snared that surprising Oscar nod for Best Picture, there was a sizable minority who had issues and amonst those, they derided the Dunkirk scene as “out of synche” so to speak. But for me, I found no violation of mood or structure and thought it rolled out naturally. Nice comparison to CHILDREN OF MEN!
You really know your McEwan!
Sam:
I have multiple copies of McEwan’s work and have studied him for about five years now…which is probably why I sound like I really know my McEwan, hehe. In fact, I have a used copy (without markings inside, which is a rarity for me) that I don’t need anymore (I have a different copy with lots of markings), and if you want it — I could send it to you. However, if you want your own copy I am sure you can find it fairly cheap on Amazon used as my copy that I would be willing to send to you has pages that are a little warped due to someone spilling a drink on it.
Still…it’s yours if you want it. I don’t mind shipping the thing (and it clears a space on my bookshelf which means it gives me an excuse to go out and by another book! hehe)…let me know.
Kevin: My e mail address is: TheFountain26@aol.com……….we’ll discuss an ‘exchange’. Thank You.
****HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE****
Lucille and I will be escorting the five kids to the Edgewater multiplex tomorrow afternoon to see the latest Harry Potter film at around 2:00 P.M. The reviews have been superb but I still ask this question:
Is anyone excited about this???
My excitement has waned with the last two entries — with Goblet of Fire being the last one I saw in theaters. I didn’t much care for whatever the last one was (the titles all blur together), the reviews make this one sound intriguing. I think if I had kids I might be more motivated to see this in the theater, but as of now, I’ll wait for DVD as I did with the 5th installment (Order of the Phoenix…that’s what it’s called!). I think they shot themselves in the foot with how long they’ve been taking on these, too. The excitement was there earlier in the series when you knew you only had to wait a year to see the next installment…now it seems like there is too much time passing between them.
Alas Kevin, that is the response I feared, especially since I completely agree with it an lament th edirection the series has taken. I would suppose the third film HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN was the best–brooding and atmospheric–but it seems like deja vu now. the kids though, admittedly are excited.
Yeah — It’s made the Chris Columbus (yikes) directed entries more appealing because there’s that perfect mix of whimsy, innocence, and dark danger (my favorite of the series still being the second film) in those first two entries. You’re right about the third being the best of the “brooding” entries. Although, the ending of the fifth entry was some really fantastic action-filmmaking.
Hi! Sam Juliano and Tony…
…Thank you, both for responding to my
inquiries…about the film The Maltese Falcon.
Sam Juliano said, “Dee Dee:
Have you actually finished reading THE MALTESE FALCON at this point? I am unfamiliar with Layman though.
Oh! No! Sam, I have never read author Dashiell Hammett’s book The Maltese Falcon.
Sam, I too was unfamiliar with author Richard Layman’s book…until a couple of months ago when I discovered his book at Shelfari and placed it in my “bookshelf.”
I ‘am already in the process of talking to Jerri Wilam and Phillipe Gauzot (As I “teasingly” refer to them as “The two lurkers”) about acquiring a copy of this book to place on my “actual” bookshelf.
DeeDee 😉
Hi! Tony,
Tony said, “Dee Dee, I have been looking for a copy of the script for ages – so many many thanks!
You are very welcome!
…I just cannot remember exactly where at the moment (I AM getting old!).
I do not think so Tony, you are getting better!
“I will find it now and post details here soonest.
I’ll wait! 😉
Tony said, Dee Dee, this is from the introduction to The Encyclopedia of Film noir (2007) by Geoff Mayer:
Oh! Yes! I ‘am familiar with this book the price tag is “pretty steep” though…
…By the way, even “The Lurkers” can’t get the price for this book down for me and believe me they are trying to get the price down.
A lot of good information about the film The Maltese Falcon in Geoff Mayer’s Book The Encyclopedia of Film noir (2007)…
…Therefore, I guess that I will “cut and paste” this information (That you, have posted …. until “The Lurkers” can get their hands on a copy of the book for me!)
“Conversation That I Overheard”
Tony: “Sam, I think the novel and the movie are so inextricably linked for me now that they are two sides of the same coin…”
Sam: “Can well understand that for sure.”
DeeDee :I second the motion Sam Juliano, that is for
sure.
Take care!
DeeDee
Oops! 😳 not “cut and paste,” but “copy and paste”
You know what I meant…to say!