Sergio Leone Web Board
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 21, 2021, 03:56:21 AM
:


Show Posts

* Messages | Topics | Attachments

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - cigar joe

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 928
1
Thanks, seen it recently from a face book link

2
Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Rate The Last Movie You Saw
« on: October 18, 2021, 02:54:27 PM »
lol

3
Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Li'l Duce's Reviews Palace
« on: October 15, 2021, 05:15:23 PM »
King of the Underworld (1939)  Probably most moronic (a joke in the movie) gangster movie ever. Actually it plays like a (conscious?) parody of the genre though I'm not sure how much of it was meant to be. What makes it worth seeing are some of the brilliant dialogues which prove how much Bogart was good at comedy: I laughed at 5-6 good ones and this earns this crap 7/10. Kay Francis is not pretty but attractive, never noticed her before.

Kay Francis is more known for romantic leading lady roles pretty good in The Jewel Robbery and One Way Passage with William Powell before his teaming Myrna Loy.

4
Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Rate The Last Movie You Saw
« on: October 13, 2021, 07:10:32 PM »
The Third Day (1965) Directed by Jack Smight who next directed Harper. Starring George Peppard, Elizabeth Ashley, Roddy McDowall, Arthur O'Connell, Herbert Marshall,  Robert Webber, 
Sally Kellerman and Arte Johnson.

This is a Transitional Noir but just barely. Amnesiac Peppard climbs up a river bank not remembering a thing. He starts walking down the road finally getting to a roadhouse where everybody sees to know him. Turns out he's rich runs the town's main employer a pottery manufacturer. Everybody hates him because he was not only a belligerent drunk when he is in his ups but was also on the verge of selling the company. His Lincoln went in the drink with the towns nymphomaniac (Kellerman).  She is still alive but barely. Her husband (Johnson) vows to kill Peppard if she dies. Peppard remembers none of this previous life. This is one of those upper class/high society Noirs where way too much time is spent in the opulent mansion and not enough time with the flashbacks with Kellerman. And those are laughably soggy rather than steamy. There is a bit of stylistic cinematography but not enough to really save it. Plays more like a dated Hollywood Code Noir than the Neo Noir's to come. 6/10

5
Once Upon A Time In The West / Re: "Something to do with death"
« on: October 11, 2021, 07:39:39 AM »
Here it is:

Just in case you don't read the Myth Busters thread here is a vindication of SW violence in an American Heritage Magazine from 1971 enjoy!

"IT DON'T HURT MUCH, MAMM"

"Then how come they're digging a grave behind the old corral, Luke?"

By JAMES S. PACKER



"Oh, Sam, what happened?"

"Nothing serious, Miss Sally Luke just picked up a little bit of lead."

"Oh.no!"

"Now Miss Sally, don't you fret. It's just a little ol' hole in his shoulder. He"ll be up and about in no time a-tall."

Sure enough, in two or three days good old Luke is up and raring to resume his defense of sweet Miss Sally, the Bar-X spread, and the honor of the old, wild West. And Luke's adventure and miraculous recovery, with slight alterations, occur over and over on the pages of western fiction and on the imaginative screens of Hollywood and television.

But what really happened to those gunshot heroes and villains in that tempestuous period of loose laws and fast gunplay? The reality was quite gruesomely different.

The disastrous effect of a large-caliber bullet on the human body can hardly be comprehended by those whose knowledge of shooting is limited to movie and television westerns. The favorite guns of the West were the .44 and .45 caliber revolvers. Bullet caliber is measured by the diameter in inches: the lead slugs for these guns were nearly half an inch in diameter. Such a bullet packs a terrific wallop, knocking the victim off his feet if it hits any solid part of the body. He doesn't just drop dead, either. Here is a descriptionof a real gunfight by a man who knew the subject well, Dr. George Goodfellow, the"gunfighte's surgeon" of Tombstone, Arizona:

In the Spring of 1881 I was a few feet distant from a couple of individuals who were quarreling. They began shooting. The first shot took effect, as was afterward ascertained, in the left breast of one of them, who, after being shot, and while staggering back some 12 feet, cocked and fired his pistol twice, his second shot going into the air, for by that time he was on his back.

It may be remarked that the recipient of the first shot was a tough man indeed to manage two shots himself before going down; but the significant phrase is"while staggering back some 12 feet." Compare this, just for instance, with the climactic scene in the movie Vera Cruz (1954), in which Burt Lancaster and Gary Cooper are resolutely facing each other in a frontier street, their hands just above their guns. In a blurred movement they both draw, and two shots ring out; but neither man staggers back one foot, let alone twelve. The logical conclusion is, of course, that they have both missed. Not so; justice has triumphed again. After a long, tantalizing pause, bad-guy Lancaster crumples to the ground, dead. He has not moved an inch otherwise (or even stopped smiling), after being hit by that .45 caliber "express train? an effect totally beyond belief. The U.S. Army, testing the Colt .45 in the Chicago stockyards, found that it would bowl over a 1,000 pound steer with one shot, even if the wound was not fatal.

Another sentimental curiosity of western mythology is the hierarchy, so to speak, of wound areas. Good guys are almost invariably lucky and get hit in the arm, the shoulder, or the fleshy part of the leg. Bad guys are much more likely to take it in the chest, abdomen, or back, which means that they are thenceforth dead. And nobody ever gets hit in the face.

The explanations are not obscure. Even an audience comfortably deluded about the destructive power of a .44 or .45 slug would hardly believe a face wound that didn't show up as more than a neat little hole. In reality, gunfighters were hit in the face fairly often, and the big lead bullets caused horrendous damage to mouths, teeth, noses, and eyes. You can't show that on the family TV set, no matter how bad the bad guy is.

The reason that heroes so often are hit in the shoulder is that this is fondly imagined to be a relatively"safe" area, well removed from the vital organs. One would think that the human shoulder was made of some selfhealing material, rather like a puncture-proof tire. The fact is that except for fat men and weightlifters, you can't penetrate much of the shoulder without striking a complicated arrangement of bones, tendons, blood vessels, and nerves. A shoulder wound from a high-caliber weapon could be not only incapacitating; it could be fatal. Civil war medical records showed that one third of the victims of shoulder-joint wounds died as a result of severe damage, such as severed arteries, or from subsequent infection. Even if the bullet hit the upper arm or forearm, sparing the shoulder joint, the injury was so great that the usual result was amputation. Any meeting between bone and the old high-caliber bullet was likely to be highly traumatic: in 1893 an Army medical report observed that "if a bone is struck, the destruction is enormous, the wound of exit frightful in size and irregularity."

This brings up another important point that TV and movie writers might take more notice of the great difference between the old lead slug and modern steel-jacketed bullets. The speed of today's high-velocity slug in effect sterilizes the outer surface and at the same time usually enables the projectile to drill a rather neat, aseptic hole through tissue and bone alike. The old lead bullet, in contrast, readily lost shape on impact and tore viciously through the victim's body, carrying along unsterile pieces of skin and clothing. It made a large wound and often left a track out of all proportion to the size of the bullet. Extensive bleeding and shock were common, and infection virtually assured. Almost every gunshot wound was highly dangerous, no matter where the bullet hit.

If a gunfighter survived a gunfight but was wounded in the process, he still had to survive the medical conditions of the Old West. Doctors were scarce, and some of those available were of doubtful value. In most places there were few if any laws regulating the practice of medicine, and all too often a frontier doctor was anyone who chose to so designate himself. Perhaps a fourth of the "doctors" of the early American West held medical degrees; and even at that it must be remembered that in those days many medical schools would certify an M.D. after just a year or two of study.

No nurses were to be found, with the possible exception of a few tender-hearted schoolmarms or"soiled doves" from the dance halls; there were no hospitals worthy of the name, no laboratories, no antibiotics, and few medicines. The universal anesthetic and cure-all was whiskey, which, while it may have raised the morale of both patient and doctor, was not calculated to increase the efficacy of surgery.

Very often, incidentally, swift and accurate surgery meant the difference between life and death. Given a gunshot wound of the abdominal cavity with one of the above caliber balls [.44 and .45], Dr. Goodfellow wrote, "if the cavity be not opened within an hour, the patient by reason of hemorrhage is beyond any chance of recovery." It hardly needs saying that blood transfusions were not to be had.

Parenthetically, it may be noted also that if there was actually a large percentage of abdominal and body wounds in western gunfights, it was not by accident. The arm, leg, and shoulder wounds so frequently enjoyed ?that seems to be the right word" by heroes and sub heroes on the screen were usually, in real life, the consequences of poor shooting and did not occur any more often than the shooter could help. He went for the broadest and most obvious target, namely the chest and abdomen of his opponent.

The opponent was well aware of this, naturally, and did his best to avoid full exposure. The dramatic showdown that has climaxed so many Hollywood and TV westerns, where two stalwarts deliberately stalk down the street toward each other, good guy waiting for bad guy to go for his gun, was certainly a rare occurrence. Far more often a man was shot without ever having had a chance to touch his gun. Jesse James was shot in the back; Virgil Earp was ambushed at night; Morgan Earp got it through a window while he was playing billiards; Billy the Kid died in a darkened room without shooting back; Wild Bill Hickok was shot from behind while concentrating on a hand of poker.

A whole separate branch of the mythology of western fiction and film has to do with fist fights and barroom brawls. Ferocious encounters featuring multiple knockdowns, repeated haymakers to the lace, kicks to the stomach, thumps on the head with bottles, chairs, and miscellaneous furniture, and other egregious violence ?usually produce nothing more than a temporary daze, with no visible bruises to speak of. Little boys find out better, of course, the first time they are in a real fist fight in the school yard.

In the meantime, the gunfight myths of the West live on in books, movies, and on television. Only the other night I watched Escape from Fort Bravo on TV, and 1 kept wondering when William Holden, the star, would acquire his mandatory flesh wound. Sure enough, he gets shot in (what else?) the shoulder, and for a while it looks as if he is done for ?almost as if the screenwriter had been studying up on the real effects of large-caliber bullets. Then, just before the ornery redskins move in to finish him off, the U.S. cavalry thunders to the rescue. Minutes later, there is our hero, sitting straight and tall in the saddle and galloping away at the head of his own cavalry troop as if nothing has happened. Oh yes, he does have his arm in a sling.

Mr. Packer is a western history buff who is studying for a doctor’s degree in entomology at Utah State University.

6
Once Upon A Time In The West / Re: "Something to do with death"
« on: October 11, 2021, 07:18:03 AM »

In The Big Gundown, I can't believe that John Corbett (Van Cleef) with his gunshot wound was able to ride off at the end.  Maybe he died 15 minutes later....

I remember reading somewhere - maybe on this board - that most times a shot in the leg or arm meant amputation, and a shot to the trunk typically ended up in death.  Maybe that was a reference to Civil War medicine. 

Obviously the world's best doctors were Doc Burrage on Rifleman and Doc Stone on Gunsmoke; Lucas and Matt were shot many times and always had full recoveries.


Yea it was on here. I posted it, it was from one of the old American Heritage hardcover magazines.

7
Once Upon A Time In The West / Re: "Something to do with death"
« on: October 10, 2021, 12:53:28 PM »
Flesh wound in the old westerns sense of something that quickly heals. He DOES deal with it pretty handily....OF COURSE he has something to do With Death. He's there rto bring it. As is Cheyenne and Frank. They're known. Harmonica isn't but the  recognition is there. As it is for Shane. Closer to an Avenging Angel. But still mortal. All walking dead men made extinct by Civilization. But MEN all the same.

Think what you want, you're not convincing me. Even Harmonica's entrances are different from everyone else. Make's the Western even cooler.

High Plains Drifter and Keoma are similar Westerns where there is a supernatural element.

8
Once Upon A Time In The West / Re: "Something to do with death"
« on: October 10, 2021, 10:52:28 AM »
Flesh wound as they used to say. The fact that he CAN be wounded is enuff to end this nonsense. And his entire focus is on Frank. Frank's his life. Just as he's Frank's death.

Flesh wound my ass. That shot knoked him on his ass.  Don't agree. He has Something to do with Death, he's not what he appears to be.

9
Once Upon A Time In The West / Re: "Something to do with death"
« on: October 10, 2021, 09:36:24 AM »
Scanned this. FRANKLY, you're lessening the film with all this forced ghostliness.

Explain his disappearing wound. Or how he knows the names of the people Frank has killed? I think the mystery adds greatly to the film. 

10
Off-Topic Discussion / Re: ZODIAC (2007) - a film by David Fincher
« on: October 08, 2021, 03:27:23 AM »
It's more like an ensemble film. All the actors do a great job though none of them really stands out performance wise, though of course most time is spent with Gyllenhaal, Downey Jr., Ruffalo, Edwards and Sevigny. They all could have been replaced by other actors with no real change in the overall quality of the film.

11
Off-Topic Discussion / Re: ZODIAC (2007) - a film by David Fincher
« on: October 07, 2021, 04:38:25 AM »
We love Zodiac. Zodiac had no thread here. The people wanted a Zodiac thread. There is now a Zodiac thread.
Let's discuss Zodiac.

Here is a Zodiac thread I usually post it on here must have forgot for it. (on this site it's hard to copy and paste and time consuming)

https://noirsville.blogspot.com/2019/10/zodiac-2007-serial-killer-neo-noir.html

There's a lot of others on my Noirsville blog BTW

12
Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Tough Guys Don't Dance (1987)
« on: October 06, 2021, 05:58:23 PM »
It has a good start but about halfway the plot gets overcomplicated, some character (Wardley, namely) loses consistence and something remains unexplained (how O'Neal loses conscience after the meeting with the couple and remembers nothing afterward). Photography, music (terrible when Hauser suffers the attack. And what has got Elgar to do with the movie?)  and acting (O'Neal and Rossellini just can't do it) are bad with the exception of Tierney, of course and Hauser. Still it is better than most neo-noir which are celebrated here. 6-7/10

Agree I gave it a 6/10 https://noirsville.blogspot.com/2021/09/tough-guys-dont-dance-1987-beach-town.html

13
Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Raw Deal (1948)
« on: October 06, 2021, 04:56:30 PM »
Just watched this again. Awful, awful film. The great Alton photography can't save it.

Too bad for you.

14
Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Rate The Last Movie You Saw
« on: October 05, 2021, 08:32:54 PM »
I guess this TV movie did all right at the time because after it aired (in a shortened version) the network picked up the series (coming to blu-ray very soon).

There are only a handful of the series episodes that are worth watching the rest go South quickly. The two films are superior.

15
Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Rate The Last Movie You Saw
« on: October 05, 2021, 03:35:55 AM »
I'm not sure we can move to other movies yet. Everybody on this board has first to admit Mank is a masterpiece.

lol

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 928



Visit FISTFUL-OF-LEONE.COM

SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
0.13842