Sergio Leone Web Board
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 22, 2017, 03:15:28 PM
Home Help Search Calendar Login Register

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 555
16  Films of Sergio Leone / Other Films / Re: She Wore a Yellow Ribbon (1949) on: October 18, 2017, 01:46:10 AM
by the way, Beaver did eventually get around to reviewing the WB BRD. Here are screencaps comparing it to the Jap BRD

for once in his life, Beaver made me laugh, writing that he is posting the screencap comparisons "without comment," so as not "to be accused of 'stating the obvious'."  Grin Yeah, the WB version is obviously a billion times better than the Jap  Afro
17  Other/Miscellaneous / Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Polanski in jail / shame on Switzerland on: October 17, 2017, 07:16:38 PM
I’ve noticed that none of the assholes on this board who defended Polanski are rushing to Weinstein’s defense.
18  Films of Sergio Leone / Other Films / Re: The Tin Star (1957) on: October 16, 2017, 05:38:03 AM
I remember it looking like an episode of a TV western series.

I have never seen a TV Western. If TV Westerns look like this, then they must look amazing  Wink A very rich black and white  Afro
19  Other/Miscellaneous / Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Roy Scheider dead at 75 on: October 16, 2017, 02:56:04 AM
There is no thread for WoF, just a blank entry in the noir index. You can go ahead and start a thread if you want  Wink
20  Other/Miscellaneous / Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Side Street (1950) on: October 16, 2017, 02:38:18 AM
This movie played yesterday on TCM's Noir Alley.

Eddie Muller's intro:

Eddie Muller's afterword:

In the intro, Muller says that the other Farley Granger-Cathy O'Donnell noir, They Live by Night, was released "in November 1949, a few weeks before Side Street opened nationwide. So the public's big gift in the Christmas season of 1949 was a double dose of Farley Granger and Cathy O'Donnell ..."

Here are the IMDB pages with release dates of They Live by Night and Side Street

According to those IMDB pages They Live by Night was indeed released in the USA in the first week of November 1949 (it had been released in some other countries several months before) but Side Street did not open in the USA until more than 4 1/2 months later – March 23 in New York, and in April across the USA. I don't think anyone would consider 4 1/2 months to be "a few weeks," and I don't think anyone would consider March to be part of "the Christmas season of 1949." So somebody made a mistake here ...
21  Films of Sergio Leone / Other Films / Re: The Noir Westerns on: October 15, 2017, 04:48:56 PM
Station West is a clear-cut Western Noir.

If you wanna get nuts, we can include every "gunfighter with a past" movie. Which basically includes half the Westerns made from 1950 on. The Gunfighter, all the Anthony Mann-James Stewart Westerns, half the Boetticher-Scott Westerns ....................

22  Other/Miscellaneous / Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Stalag 17 (1953) on: October 15, 2017, 04:45:09 PM
I think this is my second-favorite Wilder movie, after Double Indemnity. Great performances and incredible cinematography.
23  Films of Sergio Leone / Other Films / Re: The Tin Star (1957) on: October 15, 2017, 04:39:38 PM
Saw this (second viewing) on TCM.

I like this movie. I give it a 7.5/10

I'm a huge Henry Fonda fan. The tutoring/mentoring bit can be a bit heavy-handed at times, but generally this is pretty good.

The potentially great gag of the doctor rolling into town for his own birthday and he's dead, is ruined, because the movie implies in the strongest possible terms that the doc will be dad. If the movie had not told us beforehand that the doc was already dead - and it wouldn't have taken too much imagination to have it done properly - it could have been a great gag.

One of the best things about this movie is the incredibly amazing cinematography.
24  Films of Sergio Leone / Other Films / Re: The Noir Westerns on: October 15, 2017, 04:14:12 PM
Some people consider Johnny Guitar a noir, too.

What do you consider a Western noir? Is it subject matter - every revenge Western? Or is it cinematography? If cinematography, you can even stretch it to My Darling Clementine and The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.

Anyway, every Western noir (as well as every Western non-noir) has its own thread in the American Western Index or Spaghetti Western Index.
25  Other/Miscellaneous / Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Jean-Pierre Melville on: October 14, 2017, 05:47:10 PM
New BRD of Le Samourai

The screencaps look like Criterion (again!) darkened the image. I don’t know how it will look on my 42” TV, but based on viewing these screencap comparisons on my iPhone, I don’t see a reason to get the Blu-ray. The bonus features are all the same from the DVD except one new 23-minute documentary about the collaboration between Melville and Delon.

The price isn’t bad - the pre-order is currently $25.99. Of course Beaver says the BRD is an upgrade - he always does. I’m not sure if I should double-dip on this one ........
26  Other/Miscellaneous / Off-Topic Discussion / Re: In Memoriam on: October 10, 2017, 07:23:38 PM
I was talking to Pileggi about what actually happened. We never discussed the movie at all.

The movie is (mostly) from Liotta's POV, so not realizing DeNiro has set the whole thing up would be part of his limited understanding of events. And DeNiro on the pay phone would necessarily be an act if he had really been arranging things. But there's no reason to assume that the character would have had to be the actor DeNiro was to pull it off. This performance could be the result of Liotta projecting back on the event from a distant future.

in a way it kind of makes sense, actually: De Niro is the one who informs Liotta that Pesci will be made, as if De Niro was in on the plan and Liotta was not. Then, on the big day, De Niro is constantly calling, extremely nervous, supposedly to hear the MOMENT Tommy gets made. I know that being made is the most significant event in the life of a gangster, but why is it so important for De Niro to know the MOMENT Tommy gets made? Can't he wait for Tommy to return triumphantly? It kind of makes sense: De Niro set it all up. And it's understandable that he'd be nervous until the moment the dirty deed was carried out.

Of course, not likely that Pileggi/Scorsese were thinking that. But it works out well, anyway  Afro
27  Other/Miscellaneous / Off-Topic Discussion / Re: In Memoriam on: October 10, 2017, 12:18:19 PM
I never read the book. But it’s my understanding that the real-life guy that Pesci was based on (Tommy DeSimone, I think?) was a crackpot who just disappeared and that the movie’s depiction of what happened to him is simply one possible scenario. Is this correct? That could explain why in the movie only Pesci gets punished – because in real life he’s the only one of the three who disappeared. So the movie decided to invent a reason for how/why he died, without properly explaining why the same fate did not fall to his co-conspirators.

As to your theory, DJ, and your discussion with Pileggi:  did he seriously say that this is a plausible theory? Or is it just one of those, “we don’t know, so anything is possible” deals? If the former, was he referring to the real-life or the movie or both?

So you say that when De Niro keeps calling on the payphone to find out if Pesci was “made,” he’s really calling to find out if Pesci was killed. And when he goes crazy and is distraught upon hearing that Pesci is dead, it’s all an act?
28  Other/Miscellaneous / Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Rate The Last Movie You Saw on: October 10, 2017, 12:09:36 PM
I win!


When you say that my answer will be “100% American,” you mean I will be looking at it from the perspective of an American and not a European? Well, of course ...

Sorry to tell you, but pretty much every country spies on every other - their politicians and civilians. And there’s no recourse for that, other than trying to put up better defenses. It will happen forever. Americans have SOME protection and legal recourse against their government; the French don’t have such protections from/recourse against the American government. But the same is true of American citizens vis-a-vis the French government. Just the facts of life.

If you saw the movies, they focus on how Obama, the supposed liberal, could do these things. I’ll leave you with this one anecdote I heard several years ago from, it with either Karl Rove or Dick Cheney, I forgot which one it was (I’ll call him “Rove/Cheney”-  said it in an interview on TV: As the 2008 presidential-election campaign was heating up, Rove/Cheney was discussing it in the White House with then-President Bush. Rove/Cheney mentioned how the outcome of the election may affect whether the Bush anti-terror measures will remain in place or be dismantled. Bush replied: “It doesn’t matter who wins. When they know what I know, they’ll do what I did.”

It’s a great line I quote often. (Did Dubya really say it, or did Karl Rove make it up ex post facto? Who knows  Wink ) But the point is: The people in power always want more surveillance ability. Is it because they know what we don’t know and they know that it is necessary? Or is it because people in positions of power naturally want more power rather than less power?

The day after 9/11, everyone wanted as much security as possible. We happily accepted massive security, because we felt unsafe. As time goes by - and thank God the domestic catastrophes we expected post-9/11 have generally not occuurred, we have naturally begun feeling more safe and become more interested in liberty.

If it sounds like I’m going back-and-forth, you may be right. As I said, this is a very difficult issue, and anyone who simplifies it one way or the other is full of shit. We need to have the ability to stop the next terror attack, but we also need a massive oversight system to ensure that surveillance cannot be abused by some guy who works in NSA and wants to spy on his girlfriend.

One final note: Both The documentary and the feature film speak critically about Obama’s kill-drone usage. That is one thing I strongly disagree with Snowden about (though he did not say what specifically about the drone issue bothers him; and of course he knows more than I do.) There’s nothing wrong with drones per se. It has certainly happened that a drone has been fired intending to kill a terrorist and there’s been collateral damage – collateral damage has happened from drones, bombs, missiles, bullets and artillery since the beginning of war and that will happen forever. It’s impossible to avoid, sadly.
Americans fighting on foreign battlefields for terror groups aren’t going to willingly come home for trial. The gov’t should sure ss hell blast them to kingdome come like any other terrorist.

p.s. To me, Snowden comes off as a very likeable and sincere guy. Perhaps this post gets me on a government watchlist - FUCK YOU BIG BROTHER !!!!!  Evil Snowden willingly had his life turned upside down because he believes that people had to be informed about the massive invitations to their privacy. I hope he gets a presidential pardon soon.
29  Other/Miscellaneous / Off-Topic Discussion / Re: In Memoriam on: October 10, 2017, 08:44:37 AM
HDS was a buddy of Walken.......

Frank Vincent (Goodfellas , Casino , Sopranos)

Get out your fuckin’ shinebox! RIP

What’s never explained in that movie is why Pesci had to die for killing the made man but De Niro and Liotta didn’t. Pesci is the one that Vincent was harassing (“Shine you shoes ... look like fuckin’ mirrors!”), which led to the murder, but all three of them were equally involved in the murder.
30  Other/Miscellaneous / Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Rate The Last Movie You Saw on: October 10, 2017, 06:22:37 AM
My bet is that your anti government side outmatches your conservative and patriotic side on this issue but I may be wrong. I'm 100% sure your answer will be 100% american though.

Between making the last post and this one, I also watched the feature film SNOWDEN (2016) by Oliver Stone.

My opinion of Snowden all along has been that he is a hero, and that opinion has not changed since watching these movies  Smiley

The term “patriotism” is meaningless. It can mean whatever one wants it to mean, therefore it means nothing. Big-government types will say Snowden was unpatriotic and a traitor; libertarians will say he is the biggest patriot of all. “Patriotism” is a ludicrous term. In this case, you can’t even use the term “conservative” when discussing Snowden’s opponents; this stuff happened during the Obama administration. It’s big-gov’t types, that’s what it is.

I am conservative on social issues and libertarian on economic/regulatory issues. Military-related matters I am pretty hawkish in. On matters of national security and freedom I think it really is important to strike the proper balance; the knee-jerk neo-con “all surveillance is ok, gov’t is always right” is just as stupid as the knee-jerk hippie “no surveillance is ever ok.” I think that in these matters, The precise details of every program have to be studied and a careful balance has to be struck – and privacy protections have to be enforced by an independent entity.

I have heard good arguments for collecting meta-data even from libertarian-leaning people. But what is irksome is that the government considers it a crime that we even know what it is collecting. Of course, once we know, it loses some effectiveness, but we have to strike a balance. Nobody wants another terror attack, God forbid. I am all for massively invading the privacy of suspected terrorists. But gov’t collecting every bit of data on everybody - and forcing companies to turn over this data - and asking us to trust it that it won’t be abused for matters like tracking your girlfriend’s online activities, that’s BS.

Bottom line: If Snowden (and others with in-depth knowledge of surveillance) felt that serious abuses and constitutional violations were going on and his conscience told him that people have a right to know what was going on, then he should be commended for coming out publicly.

What’s very important is to distinguish between Snowden - who released specific information that he felt was a massive abuse of privacy, and specifically had responsible journalists take care of it so that they would not release legitimately classified information - and idiots like Julian Assange and wikileaks and Bradley (ahem, Chelsea) Manning, Who simply stole whatever information they could get their hands on and publicized it indiscriminately, thereby putting peoples lives in danger. Even Snowden bashed WikiLeaks for doing things like that without any responsibility. What Manning and Assange are doing is very different than what Snowden did. It’s insane to think that Obama commuted the sentence of Bradley Manning but not Snowden. Maybe the LGBTQ people convinced him to do it because Manning “courageously” made himself a pussy.

(I have read implications - nothing hard or detailed - That in order to get asylum in Russia, Snowden may have given some classified information to the Russians. Again these have just been allegations and guesses with zero proof. Assuming this is not true), I think Snowden is a courageous person and I hope he gets pardoned so he can come home and live in peace.

p.s. The government is unhappy that the tech companies these days do not cooperate when the government requests information even about real terrorism cases. Most famously, the government was upset that Apple would not hack the iPhone of the San Bernardino terrorist. I think that in this case Apple was totally wrong - this was a real terrorist who had murdered many people, and if being able to view the contents of his phone could perhaps allow the gov’t to see if he had contacts with anyone and Maybe break up terrorist cells, that would be a very good thing and certainly would not be any violation of privacy. But I am sure that part of the reason that tech companies are so against working with government is that the government is so abusive with this, forcing companies to turn over data that are real abuses of privacy and that the tech companies feel doesn’t have anything to do with terrorism. So now the tech companies are saying that they won’t work with government at all. That’s what happens - the gov’t has lost its credibility that it won’t absuse its power.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 555


Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.062 seconds with 18 queries.