OTTO PREMINGER, S / D

that chris fujiwara book mentioned above is pretty worthless IMO. just superficial "analyses" of films with very selective biographical information. and lots of errors of fact.

xpost

i sold my DVD of bonjour tristesse to ryuichi sakamoto!

For the longest time, the Fry's by me kept a copy of BT in their "Foreign" rack.

that's understandable, i guess

is it just me who gets annoyed when foreign films are alphabetized by article? so "la ronde" is in the Ls (as are many if not most French films), "il grido" is in the Is, etc. i feel like video stores would be doing the world a service if they stopped this.

i will always love that ridiculous turning point/reveal in Bunny

boy I can watch Advise and Consent at any time.

Just watched the BluRay of The Court-Martial of Billy Mitchell, which is def not top-drawer Otto but is fascinating for its commonalities w/ Advise and Consent (politics, treason, D.C. locations), In Harm's Way (the military as a flawed and even sociopathic institution), Anatomy of a Murder (courtroom drama w/ special Method Actor prosecutor, in this case Rod Steiger). Also its current resonances with "a bad soldier" choosing country over Army -- Gary Cooper as Bradley Manning?

watched the cardinal, long but p good. feels almost gump-like where the main character gets involved w/ race relations in the us south and the rise of nazism in austria. it's also better when it's personal (his questioning his faith and relationship w/ his sister) than when global. some interesting wiki notes

The Vatican's liaison officer for the film was Joseph Ratzinger,[2]

also i thought tryon was really good - didn't know him at all, interesting life and -Thomas Tryon was born on January 14, 1926, in Hartford, Connecticut, as the son of Arthur Lane Tryon, a clothier[1][4] and owner of Stackpole, Moore & Tryon. - this clothing store still exists downtown hartford

I love Tryon's book Harvest Home.

I watched Advise and Consent last night, for what must be the fifth or sixth time (within a window of less than a decade). It’s turning into one of my favorite movies ever, i.e. Top 50 or so. Don’t read this if you haven’t seen it.

Its treatment of politics and politicians is very much of a pre-Vietnam/Watergate moment, and will exasperate anyone with a less accommodating viewpoint--that, as messy as the process may be, you have (mostly) good people trying to (mostly) do the right thing. That’s not what I love about it. (Though I do find it kind of moving when Lew Ayres, seconds after being elevated to the presidency, gets down from his desk and makes his way through the senators.)

It’s the way the story is structured that draws me in and impresses me more and more each time. For the first two-thirds, it’s essentially Leffingwell vs. Cooley. And then, almost out of nowhere, and segueing with a shot that only begins to resonate the second time through--Brig Anderson pulling his car into the driveway and calmly walking towards his perfect house and perfect family--it becomes something else entirely. Alan Drury’s novel was a huge best-seller, so I imagine most people who saw the film in 1962 knew about the big plot twist already; even knowing that it’s coming now, I still find the narrative shift brilliantly rendered.

The film’s treatment of homosexuality is fascinating, spinning off in about six different directions at once. It’s gimmicky--Preminger courted controversy. It’s guilty of the most obvious clichés of its day: the closeted gay character must commit suicide, while another gay character must end up face down in the street, helpless. At the same time, though, Ray Shaff (Anderson’s inconvenient past) is not trivialized or caricatured--he follows Anderson into the street and very rationally tries to explain that he was offered a lot of money, what could he do? Larry Tucker’s character is not a caricature--loopy, yes, but thoughtful. As much as I love the parallel set up between Anderson and Leffingwell, both of them trapped by their pasts, it’s clear that Leffingwell was never actually a Communist, but I think it’s almost as clear that Anderson is gay--the way his wife talks of their marriage seems to make that clear. The other thing the film does...I want to say this carefully; I don’t want to offend anyone who’s gay (or anyone)...is that, via the gay bar, it makes homosexuality the great taboo subject it would have been in 1962, the complete opposite of what almost any kind of art sets out to do today. I can’t remember who it was, maybe Bruce LeBruce or John Waters, saying in an interview that he hated domesticated films like Philadelphia, that he wanted the illicitness of Cruising and the 1970s back. That’s Advise and Consent, at least to a degree. I don’t think it was a film that was discussed very favorably in The Celluloid Closet, but I find those few seconds inside the gay bar, the way that sequence is handled, kind of amazing. (I wonder what Sinatra thought? I would think they would have cleared the use of his song with him.)

Charles Laughton is something else. Not sure I buy the accent, but what a memorable creation. Same for George Grizzard’s Ackerman--in some ways, I find him to be the film’s most interesting character, the one that’s hardest to pin down as a “type” that can be transferred to today.

Though I do find it kind of moving when Lew Ayres, seconds after being elevated to the presidency, gets down from his desk and makes his way through the senators.)

Excellent shot scene, with Preminger's adjudicatory camera noting the space and grandeur of the chamber and the senators' roles in it.

I mostly agree with your take about the gay bar scene. It's a gay place! The bartender, not hiding his effeminacy, encourages him to enter. In fact, the merryness of the bar complements Brigg's moroseness; it's clear Preminger thinks the closet is an awful place.

Lew Ayres was so good at these quiet sad types (in Holiday he gives one of my favorite supporting performances by anyone).

Kael's wrong about that scene; in this case she's the one who looks like a square.

That's definitely the feeling I take away from the film. I understand Kael's complaint ("...it's such a lurid, evil place that the director seems grotesquely straight"), but I'm more apt to put that down to a) Preminger loving controversy, and b) the simple fact that it's 1962, and what else would you expect from a big-budget Hollywood film. But it's much more complex than that--Anderson's wife apologizing for what may be (child notwithstanding) a sexless marriage, the eloquence of Anderson's letter, the seeming decency of Ray Shaff.

Found the background to Drury's conception of Anderson interesting (didn't know about any of this):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lester_C._Hunt#Son.27s_arrest_and_Hunt.27s_suicide

That's what I mean though: even after watching it the first time ten years ago that bar did not look not lurid or evil.

The way that Harley Hudson is shut out of everything and self-deprecatingly jokes about is excellent--every VP should see the film. Anderson, at his lowest moment, telling Hudson that he may be the most underappreciated man in Washington is another nice moment.

"about it"

The conception of Hudson is the most dated element actually, but not to the film's detriment. It's impossible after 1980 to imagine an impotent vice president (even Quayle got invited to Cabinet meetings).

Just watched Laura for the first time since I was a kid, I think it must have been the 2012 release cos I recall from a Bradshaw review that this cut has the original credits restored with the war bond advert "Buy Yours In This Theatre". I don't think I could express anything that hasn't already been expressed how good this movie is. I was shocked at how well preserved the source cut must be for a movie from '44. It is in more pristine condition than many 60's/70's movies I have seen recently. Tierney, Webb and Andrews are all perfect and Price's against type dim lothario is brilliant as well.

i think that was Price's type at that point.

Sorry, yeah it probably was. I just meant against my narrow perception of his type.

Not seen too many of his early roles.

watched it for the first time this week, was also startled by Price

The way in which Preminger, the writers, and Webb depict Lydecker's sexuality is bizarre to say the least; I don't think it's supposed to make sense.

I hadn't noticed before that Laura walks back into her apartment almost exactly halfway through the running time

I'd avoided In Harm's Way because I've found better things to do than watch Kirk Douglas and John Wayne as Navy officers for three hours. Turns out it's a solid movie, in his second tier, with his usual long takes and cool performances. Patricia Neal sets her eyes on Wayne and doesn't quit until she beds him: his best screen partner since Angie Dickinson.

Whirlpool is a bananas noir followup to Laura, and in its way almost as good. Gene Tierney as an unhappy klepto married to a prosperous shrink, and Jose Ferrer is the villainous quack hypnotist who's supplied with some phenomenally acid lines by Ben Hecht.

I only listened to a little of Richard Schickel's disc commentary, but he called Tierney "Fox's resident somnambulist."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huqyli8aE_g

that trailer's kinda spoilerrific, sorry

I've almost checked Whirlpool out several times. Thanks for the push.

Gene Tierney's hair though...

what of it? i really can't tell if women's hair is good or bad, esp retro

I just watched Whirlpool last night (actually over the course of three nights, which I almost never do.) Found myself wishing it was a bit MORE bananas tbh, although most of the plot twists are pretty ludicrous, and Jose Ferrer is wonderfully oily in it.

heh how COULD it be nuttier? w/out being bad?

Let's hope this Laura remake never happens given, to quote Film Comment, the adapter's "feather-light touch":

http://www.avclub.com/article/james-ellroy-write-fox-2000s-remake-1944-noir-clas-208587

Nuttiness in plot contrivances, yeah, but Tierney is glacial and Conte is wooden, I dunno, I just found it slow (hence why three nights to finish it; I kept falling asleep.)

Confession: I don't quite get what's so great about Laura. At least when Clifton Webb isn't on screen.

Dana Andrews and Gene Tierney's instant chemistry on first meeting. He's been hearing about Laura for days and here she is!

I love the scene where they're drinking Shelby's cheap whiskey.

Another confession: when she first appeared in the apartment, I assumed it was a dream sequence. Maybe the way Preminger shot everything prior to her arrival was meant to throw the audience off in such a way?

yep

I didn't particularly pick up on or respond to the chemistry between Tierney and Andrews, which is probably why the middle section of the film felt so saggy to me. Awesome first 30-45 minutes, though, and it certainly picks up again when Webb re-enters the picture towards the end.

I've seen it two or three times, not for a few years. I think I'm basically with you; I like it, but not nearly as much as Double Indemnity or The Big Sleep (which I mention because of historical proximity--I realize all three are very different), not to mention Advise and Consent. My mom would always name either Laura or All About Eve as her favourite movie.

Who's gayer -- Shelby or Walter?

What might make the film odd viewing in 2015 is accepting Waldo and Shelby as Laura's suitors.

when men had CLASS

(yeah, vs Neil Patrick Harris in Gone Girl, gimme a break)

what's that got to do with this thread, gramps?

seems kinda obvious

keyboard dipped in olive water

Haven't you heard of science's latest triumph, the Flag Post?

more otto acid anecdotes:

Nick's thirteen-year-old boy, Griffin, had heard Janis Joplin was going to make an appearance at the party, so he talked Lenny into letting him go. At some point in the evening, a bald German man who seemed to be experiencing a bad acid trip latched onto the boy, asking his help getting settled somewhere. "I thought it was Colonel Klink" from the television show Hogan's Heroes, Griffin said. It was the film director, Otto Preminger.

Laura is wonderful

Is twin peaks an extended homage?