Jump to content
🔒 The Earwolf Forums are closed Read more... ×

WatchOutForSnakes

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    414

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Posts posted by WatchOutForSnakes

  1. Posted

    3 hours ago, AlmostAGhost said:

    Hmm no not yet, let me see if I can fit it in with any regularity or not.  I don't even always watch the How Did It Get Made movie, so we'll see.

    Also I'm not particularly a musical fan, nor knowledgeable about the genre, so it'll be better to let others pick

    I'm also interested in expanding my movie chops with musicals. I usually think I won't like them, but then I can recite Annie from memory. 

    ETA - It's great that the regulars on these forums are so welcoming :)

    • Like 8

  3. Posted

    A couple omissions that have been eating at me: 

    1) When Lance pulls up next to Danja after tracking her with Cliff's bike, Danja says to him, "Hop in." What about his bike? Surely it's not attached to that car anywhere. I think there's an ADR line added where he says, "wait my bike!" or something like that, but he just leaves Cliff's bike out in the middle of nowhere? 

    2) When Danja and Lance are driving she starts talking about what a great guy Stargrove Sr. is and says something about how much he did for her and her family - what did he do? Where is her family? We never find out. 

    3) When Lance and Cliff pull up to wherever the Mad Max crew is, there are a couple of bikes next to the wall and Lance asks, "Can you hot-wire that one?" and Cliff is all, "yeah" but then they just leave and that never comes back into play. 

    Also, if you ask me, Cliff is the real hero of the movie.

    • Like 1

  4. Posted

    13 hours ago, sycasey 2.0 said:

    Pretty sure there was talk about the new lighting ideas introduced for this movie (like having the window blinds cast shadows over the scene). I heartily disagree that this film doesn't have anything going on in those departments. It's done subtly, but I definitely sensed careful decision-making with shot selection and editing (it's Billy Wilder, fer crissake!).

    The Third Man was on the original 1998 version of the list. I think it was taken off for being seen as not sufficiently American (the production company was British).

    I agree with the shot selection and editing. The use of shadows and lighting is intentional and beautiful. 

    Also, The Third Man is my favorite noir, but I would also guess it could no longer count as "American." In 1999 the British Film Institute named it the best British film of all time. 

    • Like 4

  6. Posted

    1 minute ago, FrancisRizzo3 said:

    Thus Lance saying "name" is what tipped off Ragnar that he was there under false pretenses, leading to the bug sweep.

    Never underestimate the mental acuity of Velvet von Ragnar.

    I figured Ragnar had Lance figured by seeing him with Danja, and because Pyramid had seen him at the stables. By shouting "Stargrove" at him, Ragnar was just checking to see what kind of reaction he'd get and whether Lance would cave right there. 

    For being a top-level spy (or spy adjacent), Danja's not so great at being inconspicuous.

    • Like 3

  7. Posted

    6 hours ago, DanEngler said:

    Speaking of babies, I forgot to mention in the All About Eve thread that I laughed aloud every time Bill called Eve "Junior".

    I don't think Paul and Amy came to an agreement on why Phyllis used a handkerchief to put the gun under the cushion. I think she called Nino after Neff said he was en route, and their plan was that Nino would arrive shortly after Neff (he did), sit in the predetermined spot (note how she only gets out of that seat to shoot Neff), and pull the gun at an opportune moment. She thus ensures her fingerprints won't be on the gun when another man is manipulated into doing her dirty work and taking the fall.

    It's an odd detail for the filmmakers to focus on after being so cavalier about Neff's fingerprints on the husband's crutches.

    The handkerchief got me too after (I think it was Paul) pointed out that an earlier draft of the script had some commentary about fingerprints being censored because it wasn't common knowledge that fingerprint technology existed. 

    • Like 2

  8. Posted

    3 hours ago, CameronH said:

    I don’t know. I feel like - especially back then - her being a lesbian would have only been seen as a part of her overall psychosis. Back in those days, in many places, it was still illegal to be gay and people were institutionalized for being homosexual.

     

    2 hours ago, taylorannephoto said:

    I was about to say that same thing. It would have been totally used as anti-LGBT propaganda.

    Both true. It's easy to want to forget that was ever the case. 

    • Like 2

  9. Posted

    19 hours ago, tomspanks said:

    One of the commentators was Ken Geist, who wrote a Mankiewicz biography.  I wanted to find out more about Geist, and in my Googling, I found out that Geist said Eve Harrington was originally conceived as a lesbian.  

    I could definitely see this!  While I don't think the film needs any changes, it almost would have made Eve's character more sympathetic in my mind. 

    • Like 1

  10. Posted

    4 hours ago, BenA.Varkentine_29772 said:

    Before she succumbed to Stamos' "manly" charms and became just another damsel in distress.

    Did she though? I'm pretty sure the "sunbathing" scene would suggest otherwise. I can't wait to hear what June has to say about that!!

    This movie is well worth the watch for Gene Simmons alone, and of course everyone's reaction to that character. It's up there (for me) with Gymkata-level craziness, though I really hoped the gymnastics played more of a role here. 

  11. Posted

    17 minutes ago, taylorannephoto said:

    I know exactly what you meant, and I still think that's wildly unrealistic. If a movie in 2018 had some girl spell out that she's getting married for herself I would roll my eyes so hard they probably would fall out of their sockets. I think it's more fucked up to question any woman's motive to marry if it's not specifically spelled out to be a terrible relationship. So my point is that even watching this movie from 1950 I do not question Margo's desire in 2018 because this is a realistic character with realistic desires and troubles.

    I'm totally on board with this train of thought and think my initial reading of the scene was probably a bit of auto-pilot analysis having been so annoyed by and used to movies that posit marriage is the only success women really need. 

    And I do think Margo and Bill ride off into the sunset and live happily ever after. Their relationship is golden. 

    • Like 1

  12. Posted

    23 hours ago, CameronH said:

    I get that, but the way I took it was less "giving up the spotlight" and more accepting that fame is fleeting. She realizes that her star is fading, but rather than obsess and drive herself crazy about trying to maintain something she has no control over, she decides to look forward to a new era in her life. It doesn't mean she's giving up on theater altogether, just that it's not going to be her sole focus anymore. 

    Good point. Perhaps its more accurate to say I'm bummed that it seemed that marriage was tipping point in her character arc.

    On the other hand, I could write a  novel about the feels I have about Margo and Bill's relationship. It feels really genuine to me in a way that movies of that era usually don't. Maybe it's the chemistry they had on screen, but also the script. She says that Bill is in love with "Margo" the actress, not Margo the person, but she's wrong. He sees her for who she really is, like when he tells her that he loves her because of some of her traits and in spite of others because they're "her tools" for navigating the cut-throat stage world. He's notably younger than her, but he's not a plaything to her. The really respect each other. They fight a lot, but they communicate. They're honest. I love that about the two of them. For all of the acting and performances and airs that people put on both on the stage and off, they seem most genuine with each other. I'm just in love with the two of them in love with each other. 

    And relevant to nothing, I also loved the whole "incomplete forward pass" line. Great turn of phrase. 

    • Like 4

  13. Posted

    16 hours ago, CameronH said:

    I'm not sure if this was intentional or not, but I thought it was interesting that the play Margo was called Aged in Wood when, generally speaking, wood tends to get stronger as it ages.

    On my third viewing of this, I find everything in every shot is intentional. On Margo's way into the theater to read for the audition, a sign on the street for one of the other shows is "The Devil's Disciple." 

    On whether Margo is just as conniving as Eve, it seems to me that theater was her life, her family, and that she wasn't with Bill as a power grab.  The familial nature of their relationships, in my opinion, is why Karen can put up with Margo's tantrums and ego. 

    ETA: It bummed me out that Margo was instantly ready to give up the spotlight as soon as she could be a "woman" after marrying Bill.  

    • Like 5

  14. Posted

    2 hours ago, The_Triple_Lindy said:

    Also incidentally, OMISSION: the doctor who asks Pahmela about her wild opera fling is the same doctor who tries to sing for Giorgio when he's there with the kids earlier, so he's obviously some opera superfan groupie. It might also be why he's on tv at the hospital. Otherwise, one could only posit that they live in some kind of Metalocalypse universe where everyone's lives revolved around Giorgio.)

    First time long time and all that.

    Isn't that same doctor (who says he is Giorgio's biggest fan) a cameo by the screenwriter, Norman Steinberg?  Maybe he really is/was a Pavarotti groupie and signed on to the project as a fan piece. 

    • Like 2
×