Skip to main content

Posts

Rear Window (1954)

Murder brings them together. Lisa (Grace Kelly) and L.B. (Jimmy Stewart) have nothing in common. He's a daredevil photographer, and he wants to keep travelling all over the world to take pictures. She is a glamour girl, happy to stay grounded in her social class and city lifestyle. One wonders how they even met and how they ever started dated. Then again, at the end of the movie, we see that Miss Torso has a boyfriend/husband who doesn't look like he should be with her, so strange things happen in relationships. When we first see Lisa enter L.B.'s apartment, Hitchcock gives her three shots from three different angles before she kisses L.B. And why not? At the time, Hitchcock (and us) might be mesmerized by her beauty, but all L.B. can think about is what's happening across the courtyard in the apartment complex. It's weird. No one but L.B. notices anything. All these people live next to, below, and on top of one another, and yet, none of them know each other, and th...
Post a Comment
Read more
Recent posts

Rope (1948)

From what I read, Hitchcock thought Rope was a failure, with the plot being ultimately "thin" and the "one continuous shot" featured in the movie as too gimmicky. After a very short 1948 run in theaters, Rope was more or less forgotten until 1984, the first time it went on VHS. It wouldn't go on DVD until 2001.  The "one continuous shot" is actually a series of ten shots. The "invisible cuts" are made by the camera, for example, going "dark" into a man's jacket and then coming back out at the beginning of the next shot. It's a pretty cool technique that isn't overly noticeable until you start looking for it, which you might when you realize that each shot is going for minutes without a cut or break.  Obviously, the film has a sort of "play" feel, as the entire movie takes place in one room of the apartment. We may look into the kitchen or down a hall, but we don't ever actually leave the main living room. I...
Post a Comment
Read more

A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984)

This movie is iconic. This movie is pretty bad. Both things can be true. As I scroll through some of the other reviews on Letterboxd, I quickly come to the conclusion that no one is reviewing/rating the movie on its merits. They're rating it from nostalgia, or they're saying that it somehow changed the face of slasher movies. Well, I'm just going to assess it like any other movie. I've watched it a few times, and every time it's bad, just in different ways.  I don't think the special effects are bad. I like them. When Freddy (Robert Englund) licks Nancy (Heather Langenkamp) through the phone, I laugh at how corny is looks, but it's still a cool effect.  What I guess I don't like about the film is never being able to tell when Nancy is dreaming and when she's awake. At some point, I just assume she's always dreaming, and then, when there's supposed to be some "unforeseen" twist, I yawn, because I already assumed that something would ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Shadow of a Doubt (1943)

With Saboteur, I mentioned that a little sound might have helped. Shadow of a Doubt opens with a waltz, and that waltz is later hummed by different members of the family. So we get sound right from the start of this film, and then a soundtrack, too, that captures the emotions of the characters. The sound helps. I did start to wonder if the plot was too simplistic. We more or less know who's guilty. We don't know from the start of what, but he's guilty. What we don't know, I guess, is what Charlie (Teresa Wright) will do about it. She's weak. First agreeing to help the Detective (Macdonald Carey). Then agreeing to help Uncle Charlie (Joseph Cotton). (Her mom/Uncle Charlie's sister comes across as weak, too. The men in the film aren't weak... just quirky and not necessarily all that smart.) Meanwhile, I like the banter between Charlie's dad (Henry Travers) and the neighbor (Hume Cronyn). They're always discussing the best way to kill each other without...
Post a Comment
Read more

Saboteur (1942)

When I watched this the first time in 2017, I ended up giving it a 2 out 5-star rating. I didn't write down any notes to explain my rationale, and so as I was re-watching the film now, I found myself trying to piece together how I might have rated it so poorly then. This time around, I appreciated the set pieces, especially the State of Liberty ending. But the film had other "set pieces," and by that, I simply mean, Hitchcock clearly took some time to figure out how to best shoot the factory, the cabin in the woods, the dockyard, the dance floor, and so on. Good camera work. Good set up of scenes. Good lighting. Just a lot of "good stuff" that a 2-star film wouldn't have.  Did the movie lack anything, then? Well, it's a quiet film. When I think of Hitchcock, I think of the dramatic score. Try watching Psycho without the soundtrack. It wouldn't be nearly the same, right? I just wonder what a good musical score would add to Saboteur.  That might, in fa...
Post a Comment
Read more

Come September (1961)

What a pleasant surprise. Robert (Rock Hudson) has exactly what he wants. Lisa (Gina Lollobrigida) is his September girl. Every September, he leaves Rome for his villa in the country, and he spends the whole month with Lisa. When the month is up, he says goodbye and goes back to Rome.  He's happy with that arrangement. I guess we're to assume that he thinks she's happy with that arrangement, too. Does he have other girls in Rome, or other girls for different months? Not that we know of. In his own way, he might be "faithful" to Lisa. But do they ever talk the other eleven months of the year? The last time Robert left for Rome, Lisa ended up meeting another man. It's July, and she's set to marry this other guy, but as luck would have it, Robert decides to go to his villa a couple months early. But how had Lisa been seeing this other guy for seven months without Robert ever knowing? This is when he learns the servant that takes care of his villa has started ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Has Anybody Seen My Gal? (1952)

The premise of this one: Samuel (Charles Coburn) is getting older, and he regrets that the love of his life got away. Before he dies, he's interested in leaving his fortune to the family of that woman's children. But he first wants to vet them to make sure they're worthy of his money.  So he goes undercover as John Smith and manages to live with the family as a boarder. They seem like a nice enough bunch, but with two kids in college, a mortgage to pay, as well as drugstore business to run, they're broke. The $8 a week he's going to pay them as a boarder will go a long way...  Meanwhile, Samuel becomes closer to the family, and he decides to give them, anonymously, $100,000 -- just to see how they'll handle the money. Harriet (Lynn Bari), the mother, goes nuts. But everyone else in the family just goes along with it? They sell the drugstore, sell the house, buy a mansion, and somehow make $100,000 feel like a billion dollars... and everyone in town believes, rig...
Post a Comment
Read more

Burn After Reading (2008)

This is the second DVD I found in a Litte Library, and I'm glad I did, because somehow -- how? -- it completely went under my radar. Think about all the great stars in this one -- John Malkovich, Brad Pitt, George Cloney, Frances McDormand -- how could this ensemble cast not make a banger of a film? Well, it is a banger. Yes, it's a comedy, but it works because everyone plays it straight. All of the characters are "quirky," but somehow, they are all playing it straight. Not once does the film go for a laugh. It's not like, say, The Big Lebowski or Fargo. I mean, those are also movies that more or less play it straight, too, but the places to laugh are more obvious, and the quirky characters in those films cross some sort of "quirky/laugh line." I have a feeling that some viewers think this movie is "second tier" Coen Brothers, because the laughs aren't as obvious. I actually don't hold that against it. No, I don't quite think it...
Post a Comment
Read more