 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What did you think of JAMAICA INN? I watched it last year and was shocked to learn it was once included in a book called "The Fifty Worst Films of All Time." I prefer it to some of Hitchcock's better known and/or more acclaimed films.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just dropped the S from L'etrange. (Screen Archives has the S there, so it's not totally my fault).
I thought Jamaica Inn was really weak. I probably hadn't seen it since I was a teen, and the BluRay looked good but was so slick it almost looked more like a Twilight Zone episode than a 30s film.
I liked some of the production value, especially the cloudy sky cycloramas on the big "exterior" sets and some of the visual effects involving the sea, but I didn't find it effective as a thriller at all. And though the bloodthirstiness of a lot of movies can be annoying, the over-forgiving nature of the two female leads in this ("I love my husband, even though he's murdered dozens of sailors" "Don't hurt that master villain who's overseen the deaths of dozens, he's not in his right mind!") drove me batty.
Not that it matters, but there's also one inexplicable continuity error, where a menacing Laughton enters the room with a gun, and then when it cuts to a wider angle the gun is gone and has seemingly disappeared from the scene entirely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just dropped the S from L'etrange. (Screen Archives has the S there, so it's not totally my fault).
I thought Jamaica Inn was really weak. I probably hadn't seen it since I was a teen, and the BluRay looked good but was so slick it almost looked more like a Twilight Zone episode than a 30s film.
I liked some of the production value, especially the cloudy sky cycloramas on the big "exterior" sets and some of the visual effects involving the sea, but I didn't find it effective as a thriller at all. And though the bloodthirstiness of a lot of movies can be annoying, the over-forgiving nature of the two female leads in this ("I love my husband, even though he's murdered dozens of sailors" "Don't hurt that master villain who's overseen the deaths of dozens, he's not in his right mind!") drove me batty.
Not that it matters, but there's also one inexplicable continuity error, where a menacing Laughton enters the room with a gun, and then when it cuts to a wider angle the gun is gone and has seemingly disappeared from the scene entirely.
***
I saw this one years ago on a big revival theater screen -- ah, those were the days! -- and while I still remember vividly the opening storm-tossed action sequence and the poetic moment just before the final fade-out, everything else in between is pretty much a blur aside from the art direction, despite my affection for Laughton, his protegee Miss O'Hara, Newton and Williams. I suspect the next time I look at it (on the BluRay) my feelings about the film will closely match yours. Just as an aside, I vaguely remember a long time ago reading an interview with Hitchcock in which he said something to the effect of, "The hardest things to photograph are children, motor boats and Charles Laughton, Lord rest his soul."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I re-read the section on it in Hitchcock/Truffaut, where he said that Laughton produced the film and insisted his part be enlarged, but it made no sense for plot reasons since his character was the secret master villain and should never have been hanging out at the criminal-filled inn at all.
It wasn't even the biggest problem with the film. Overall Hitchcock seemed kind of bored, showed almost none of his usual flair. Even something like Under Capricorn may be minor but the visuals are amazing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My sympathies for you having to endure The Neptune Factor. I saw this as a kid when it first came out, having been stoked to see the movie by the exciting poster they created for it. The poster was a classic bait and switch. Come see giant sea monsters attack a submarine! In reality, the movie was a talky, low budget bore. Very unrewarding.
It was pretty terrible. I think I saw it on ABC in my youth. It did seem more lavish than expected, if only because of all the full-size scenes shot on- and underwater.
As far as unscary giant-small animal movies from that era go, it would make a great double feature with Night of the Lepus.
Very odd to see Ben Gazzara in a movie like this. Also answers the trivia question "Which sci-fi movie besides The Black Hole did Yvette Mimieux and Ernest Borgnine star in?"
It was fun to see Donnelly Rhodes, the ship's doctor from the Battlestar: Galactica reboot, as one of the leads.
But as far as terrible Fox films from the early 70s go, it can't compare to what I'm watching now, Myra Breckenridge. They made a really special kind of bad movie in those days (But kudos for casting Farrah Fawcett and Tom Selleck years before either were names).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I remember Donnelly Rhodes from 'Soap'. And ten yrs before he was kind of a hunk in a Mission: Impossible ep.
Myra Breckinridge was quite all over the map. But in 1967 was the more-or-less intentional mess that is Casino Royale.
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's "L'ÉTRANGE" MONSIEUR DUVALLIER, Scott (again). That S and the absence of the accent seem to have minds of their own.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I feel no moral compunction about adding or not adding accent marks. I'm perfectly happy without them. This is essentially a blog, after all.
Hey, if anyone goes to see Pig, look for the older blond actress who plays "Mac" in a couple early scenes. That's Gretchen Corbett, beloved familiar face from 70s TV (Rockford, Banacek, Columbo, et al). She gets to use language she never got to use on the Universal lot. (at least, not on camera)
|
|
|
|
|
|
I feel no moral compunction about adding or not adding accent marks. I'm perfectly happy without them. This is essentially a blog, after all.
Hey, if anyone goes to see Pig, look for the older blond actress who plays "Mac" in a couple early scenes. That's Gretchen Corbett, beloved familiar face from 70s TV (Rockford, Banacek, Columbo, et al). She gets to use language she never got to use on the Universal lot. (at least, not on camera)
Compunction or not, the S is back in for some bizarre reason, "S"trange even.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
