THE THOMAS CROWN AFFAIR (1999) Bringing Sexy Back

Thomas_Crown_1999_12plane crop

One of those truisms of life is that sequels and remakes rarely equal let alone surpass their original. Not impossible, but rare. When I first watched Norman Jewison’s THE THOMAS CROWN AFFAIR (1968) I enjoyed the details of the heist, but overall felt underwhelmed. With leading actors like Steve McQueen and Faye Dunaway, combined with high style, I was impressed by the visuals (especially the costume design and the mod editing). But the lack of chemistry between Dunaway and McQueen (how could anyone NOT have red hot chemistry with super sexy Steve?!); it left me cold.

download-12

Then the remake came. John McTiernan’s THE THOMAS CROWN AFFAIR (1999) took Alan Trustman’s original story that centered on a bank heist in the 1968 film and flipped it into an art heist. Rare art heist allowed for a sexier, more stylish plot vehicle to drive this remake with more clever moments of cat-and-mouse pace and better build up of sexual tension.

Screen Shot 2017-11-19 at 7.17.39 PM

Pierce Brosnan is Thomas Crown, the charming and confident billionaire playboy who collects rare paintings and crashes 100 thousand dollar sailboats, just for kicks. He’s bored in life because he’s never found an equal, as we see him relay in confidence to his therapist, who is portrayed by Faye Dunaway. When a heist at the art museum by a group of outsiders goes awry yet leaves a Claude Monet missing, it’s actually Crown who becomes the main suspect. Enter Rene Russo as Catherine Banning, insurance investigator and his greatest adversary and equal.

Screen Shot 2017-11-19 at 7.23.47 PM

Thus begins the chase of cat and mouse. But who is the cat and who is the mouse? Banning works in tandem with the police (Denis Leary and Frankie Faison as Detectives McCann and Paretti) but prefers her work as a soloist. As Banning hunts down her prey, she begins to fall for Crown as he does her. Banning is sexy, boldly stylish, empowered, clever, ambitious, supremely confident and unyielding when she goes for what she wants. They are the same.

I know full well that many of my classic film friends will respond in opposition to my assertion that this film from the late 90s could possibly surpass its classic original. But let’s take a deeper look.

The Heist:

This is no simple set-up and chase crime thriller with guns blazing. This film does a masterful job with clever editing and unexpected plot devices to keep us interested. (Warning: a few spoilers may pop up.) Even in an early scene, a Trojan horse device is literally used as a Trojan horse. All the details from the initial heist to the final reveal involve unique and thought-provoking twists and turns. One of my favorites involves a parade of men in bowler hats as camouflage.

The Style:

images-14

It may not be the cool swinging 60s style of the 1968 film, but style it exudes nonetheless. If sexy is a style, then Brosnan and Russo bring that particular flavor of style in heavy measure throughout. Brosnan is in Bond-form for a commanding presence of athleticism and cool confidence in a classically tailored suit and the occasional similarly cut shirtless look. Fire-haired Russo is draped in bold fashions to match the boldness of her moves. One particular scene is a blush-worthy dance centered on a body-skimming dress worn by Russo that you could read the The New York Times through.

In all of the memorable scenes, Bill Conti’s music plays a key role. Obviously it serves invaluable to bring sex appeal. In other scenes, it quickens the pace and/or provides the right touch of playful whimsy.

The Players:

crown

The ongoing tango between the Crown and Banning characters should be constantly competitive, and electric with sexual tension. Brosnan and Russo deliver. For me, McQueen’s interpretation is appropriately cool as one would expect from him, but his interactions with Dunaway comes across as almost disinterested. As for Dunaway, the style is undoubtedly gorgeous but her coolness transcends into cold. Leary and Faison do a fine job for a sliver of lightness in character acting.

Another test for what ultimately makes the 1999 version the victor for me, is how it holds up in repeat screenings. I find myself enjoying watching the remake many times over as it has held up well. I cannot say the same for its original. (Okay Kell, brace yourself for the pitch fork frenzy of feedback from readers.)

—————

thieves11-1

This has been my contribution to the “It Takes A Thief” Blogathon, hosted by Moon In Gemini, November 17-19, 2017. Be sure to read all the other entries for posts on films that ‘steal’ your attention!

 

 

Advertisements

CMBA’s Banned and Blacklisted: CROSSFIRE (1947)

 

Incredibly tense, politically-charged times in Hollywood erupted seventy years ago when the infamous “The Hollywood Ten” were cited with contempt of Congress on November 24, 1947. After ten writers and directors refused to fully answer questions to the HUAC (House Un-American Activities Committee) regarding involvements with the Communist Party, thus began the blacklisting of scores of artists in the industry. Although it is not a crime to be a Communist in this country, and the many allegations that artists were injecting Communist propaganda into their films were never proven, the witch hunt continued and wrecked the careers and lives of many.

Even those who cooperated with the HUAC, were never affiliated with the Communist Party, and/or challenged the legitimacy of the process found themselves blacklisted thanks to the rumors and whisperings from the HUAC. Even being accused of being a Communist assumed guilt in Hollywood for which there was no crime committed. The blacklisting did not end until 1960. It was a dark stain in our history.

Two of The Hollywood Ten, producer and screenwriter Adrian Scott and director Edward Dmytryk, worked together to complete the pivotal film, CROSSFIRE, just a couple of months prior to being subpoenaed to the HUAC. After several successful films, including this one, this would be their final collaboration. With the screenplay written by John Paxton, it was based on Richard Brooks’ military-influenced crime novel “The Brick Foxhole” which was originally centered on the murder of a homosexual man. Producers Adrian Scott and Dore Schary pitched a new twist to the story. For CROSSFIRE, the bulk of the story unravels the crime post-murder, and the victim is a straight Jewish man.

Schary was concerned the anti-Semitic messaging would be a red flag, gaining unwanted attention from the HUAC. As it turns out, he was right. Interestingly, another film with anti-Semitism themes, Elia Kazan’s GENTLEMAN’S AGREEMENT was released later the same year with even more critical acclaim as that year’s Oscar winner for Best Picture.

Despite a tight budget and shooting schedule, plus tackling a controversial script under watchful eyes, CROSSFIRE (1947) remains one of RKO’s if not perhaps of any studio’s best film noirs. Beginning with a murder, we are then introduced to Robert Young as the serene, pipe-smoking Finley, who is investigating the case, followed by a slew of potential suspects, friends and foes, of which many are military. We discover that not only was the victim Jewish, but that appears to be the only motivation for his demise. Finlay is hunting down a madman whose rage lurks just below the surface and whose deep bigotry results in murder.

With a headlining trio of three swell Roberts- Robert Mitchum, Robert Ryan, and Robert Young- the casting offers unforgettable performances. Mitchum and Young represent a calm front of tag-teaming good guys, fleshing out demobilized soldiers with possible ulterior motives. Robert Ryan plays Montgomery, the bigoted monster of intermittent restraint of rage, to perfection. A role he performed so well he earned an Oscar nom, that also typecast him for a majority of his career.

The supporting cast is outstanding, as well. Sam Levene, Paul Kelly, Steve Brodie, Jacqueline White, and Gloria Grahame to name a few. In her first role with RKO following a brief stint at MGM, Grahame is a stand-out and it earned her an Oscar Nomination for Best Supporting Actress. Like Ryan, this film set the mold for many more-naughty-than-nice roles to come. What really drives this film in addition to these performances is the phenomenal cinematography from J Roy Hunt. When one gushes about the glowing beauty of light and dark shadows of a great film noir (as I often do), CROSSFIRE is a perfect example.

For me, one of the most powerful moments comes when a potential witness for the police faces a moral dilemma. He questions whether he should help the police capture Montgomery when he wasn’t directly affected by Monty’s anti-Semitism. Finlay gives him a rather convincing speech about his own Irish grandfather who faced similar treatment as a new immigrant. It’s powerful because Finlay must convince the apathetic soldier that anyone can be the target of bigotry so none of us can afford to look the other way.

History is a mixed bag for Edward Dmytryk. His talents are rarely disputed. After serving time for his conviction as part of The Hollywood Ten, he experienced regret. He faced the HUAC again in 1951 and recanted his initial defiance. Between his prison time with subsequent blacklisting, and his public distancing from The Hollywood Ten, he made a couple of films in the U.K. Then, Stanley Kramer gave him a chance to transition back to Hollywood. He went on to make many more films in Hollywood for the rest of his career, including winning an Oscar for THE CAINE MUTINY (1954).

Some say he was able to save his career by recanting. Some say he sold out. Fast-forward seventy years later and what have we learned from this? Where does history judge all of those involved in the blacklisting, the HUAC, victims and perpetrators alike? Some have stated “it was a different time” and “people were protecting their jobs to support their families” in sympathy for those that did not defy the HUAC or even named names. Yet many modern-day Americans find it incredulous to believe it took so long to stand up to the HUAC when no actual crimes were committed by those targeted. With hindsight, the wrongs of that ‘Red Scare’ witch hunt seem obvious.

Hateful intolerance remains a presence. We live in precarious times today that reveals an alarming buildup of bigotry and nationalism similar to previous historic levels. Wedged between the nazi horrors revealed in the Nuremberg trials and the onset of McCarthyism, CROSSFIRE’s take on the dangers of bigotry was topical then yet remains relevant to this day.


*This post was my contribution to the CMBA Fall 2017 Blogathon, Banned and Blacklisted, Nov. 15-19, 2017. As a proud member of the Classic Movies Blog Association, I feel privileged to participate and encourage you to read the other entries.

Announcement: 6th Annual WHAT A CHARACTER! BLOGATHON

WAC2017

Announcing the SIXTH ANNUAL What A Character! Blogathon
December 15-17, 2017

When you think about your very favorite classic movies, what makes them your favorites? The films worth watching multiple times, endlessly discussing, or just chilling out with…what makes them the cinematic equivalent of comfort food? Sure, great writing is key, but those lines are just words without the right actors delivering them. Beautiful costumes are great, but without the right actors wearing them, they’re just clothes. Stunning, authentic art direction and set design are wonderful, but empty, without the right actors inhabiting that world. And gorgeous cinematography can only hold your eye for so long, without the right actors being lit. And so on.

Chances are, it’s not just the perfect leads that win your go-to films their place in your heart — it’s their pals and sidekicks as well. The wise-cracking best friend or fellow chorine, cranky boss, sympathetic bartender, confirmed spinster secretary, intrepid cop, jealous girlfriend, second-in-command racketeer or bomber pilot, workaholic director…faces familiar from their appearances in many films over the years, their names — not so much. To take a couple obvious examples, what would Casablanca be without Dooley Wilson, Sydney Greenstreet, Peter Lorre, Conrad Veidt, S.Z. “Cuddles” Sakall, Madeleine LeBeau, John Qualen, and Leonid Kinskey? How about My Man Godfrey without Alice Brady, Eugene Pallette, Gail Patrick, Jean Dixon, Alan Mowbray, and Mischa Auer? Probably pretty good films, but just not the same, not as lovable, not as classic.

images-1

Ritz 3 Alice Brady Carole Lombard William Powell My Man Godfrey

Thus the objective of the What A Character! Blogathon has always been to shed the spotlight on these lesser-known but equally talented thespians, whose names usually appeared below the title, but who always elevated any kind of material from Oscar-winning to the most tired, often without saying a word. Please join us- Paula of Paula’s Cinema Club/ @Paula_Guthat, Aurora of Once Upon A Screen/ @CitizenScreen, and yours truly Kellee of Outspoken & Freckled/ @IrishJayhawk66 – for the SIXTH year in a row of paying tribute to the versatility and depth of supporting players.
If a salute to lesser-known but essential Hollywood thespians is right up your movie alley, please review the guidelines below, then leave me a comment below.

  • Let at least one of the hosts know which character actor is your choice.
  • Don’t take it for granted we know exactly who you are or where your blog resides – please include the title and URL of your blog, also your Twitter handle if you have one.
  • We will not accept repeats (previously published posts), or duplicates, since there are so many greats worthy of attention, but your choices are not limited to classics. You can choose any character actor from any era and from the medium of television, which has featured talented regulars since the beginning, and continues to do so.
  • Publish your WAC! post on either December 15, 16, or 17, 2017. Let us know if you have a date preference; otherwise, we’ll split publicizing duties equally among the three days.
  • Please include [one of] the WAC! 2017 event banner[s] included in this post on your blog to help us promote the event. Please also include the banner in your What A Character! post.
  • Please send any of us the direct link to your post once you have published it. Searching on social media sites can lead to missed entries. My contact info: prattkellee@gmail.com / twitter~ @IrishJayhawk66 ~or, simply leave a comment below
  • HAVE FUN and spread the word!

Thank you to TCM for the tagline inspiration and to all you bloggers and film fans for your ongoing participation and support for six years running!

Participating blogs and their choice of actors:

Caftan Woman – John Alexander

Movie Movie Blog Blog – Bruce Altman

Taking Up Room – Eve Arden

The Last Drive In – Martin Balsam

Old Hollywood Films – Beulah Bondi

Wide Screen World – Alan Hale, Sr.

The Old Hollywood Garden – Edward Everett Horton

Real Weegie Midget Reviews – Ian McShane

In the Good Old Days of Classic Hollywood – Agnes Moorehead

Wolfian Classic Movies Digest – Eugene Pallette

Carole & Co. – Nat Pendleton

Outspoken & Freckled – ZaSu Pitts

The Hitless Wonder Movie Blog – Michael Ripper

The Dream Book Blog – Elizabeth Russell

A Shroud of Thoughts – William Schallert

Cinematic Scribblings – Haruko Sugimura

Hometowns to Hollywood – Clinton Sundberg

Once Upon a Screen – Mary Wickes

Silver Screenings – European Character Actors in Casablanca

Silver Scenes – TBA

~Kellee

download-2

9 to 5 (1980)… has the workplace really changed?

download-2

In the thirty-seven years since Colin Higgins’ Nine To Five (1980) was released, it’s easy to reflect upon this comedic view on feminism and the office workplace and note the changes. The typewriters and other technologies (or lack thereof), the clothes, hairstyles, cars… they all seem dated to the modern eye. But look deeper. The messages being pitched in this film, the struggles of the main characters, and even of the supporting characters, well, they rage on.

There are many films that have been set in the office workplace. But this film stood out for me. Perhaps based on timing, as I was the highly influential age of thirteen when it released. The second-wave feminism of the sixties and seventies challenged the status quo in the battle of the sexes: Billy Jean King, Title 9, NOW, Roe vs. Wade, the ERA and many more influencers shaped our emerging cultural awareness. Then 9 to 5 came along to challenge sexism and the battle for women’s equality in the American trenches… the workplace.

images-2

Not presented as some radical documentary or anything serious whatsoever, 9 to 5 is a comedy. But the message remains clear as a bell, through the laughter. What strikes interesting is not only that it’s a comedy but I would go further to say it’s a slapstick comedy that fits a formula and styling not unlike a true classic comedy, common several decades prior.

Comedy serves a great purpose to drive the messages home thanks also to a talented cast. Our main characters are Lily Tomlin as the hardworking, single mom and career woman Violet Newstead, Jane Fonda as Judy Bernly, is the meek housewife entering the workforce for the first time, Dolly Parton as the curvy, country- gal and secretary, Doralee Rhodes. Then there’s the boss, Dabney Coleman as Frank Hart. Or as he is better known, “a sexist, egotistical, lying, hypocritical bigot.”

The trio are an unlikely threesome, each with very different backgrounds so they don’t connect immediately. Their only true connection is not only the company they work for, but the insufferable pig in charge, Mr. Hart. Despite initial misperceptions of one another, they soon bond in being victims of Mr. Hart and his domineering, sexist ways. The pace picks up nicely when Violet mistakenly believes she has accidentally poisoned the boss. In a state of panic, they rally together in crime. No actual poisoning, their true crime turns to kidnapping- to buy time and prove he is embezzling company funds. In the end, the threesome survive and thrive, as do the rest of the staff and the company as a whole under these ladies’ leadership, and of course the villain gets his comeuppance.

images

There are some very appealing reasons to enjoy this often overlooked film…

Girlfriend Friendship:

Unlike so many comedies regarding battle of the sexes, 9 to 5 takes its time to show female friendship, based on how three very different women start off in typical office dynamics. Initially, their differences keeps them apart and whets the water cooler chat. Violet judges Judy (she’s ‘just a no-job-experience housewife’ whom she’s burdened with training, and she mocks her outdated clothing). As Violet and other staff have already judged and assumed the worst of Doralee (she must be shtupping the boss because she’s well-endowed), Violet convinces Judy to believe the same. Because of their common enemy, the three realize just how wrong they were about each other.

So many light comedies prefer to keep women in the catty zone, always competing for the man. It’s often men who are highlighted as the adventurous buddies. This film flips that stereotype. When women move past the barriers of judging each other and trust/support each other instead, they make HUGE accomplishments.

 

 Fantasies Become Reality:

There is a delightful fantasy segment where each of the ladies describes how they’d like to seek revenge on Hart. Timid Judy, who is especially vulnerable now as her husband just left her for his secretary, expresses bold confidence in her fantasy as a wild game hunter. Hart is the target and Judy is well-armed on the hunt with an enormous gun. Classic slapstick is alive and well in this very funny, and rather cartoonish scene. We see Judy blossom in self-esteem throughout the film and the audience knows this is greatly due to their supportive friendships as they go through wild adventures.

images-4

Doralee describes her fantasy where she turns the table on Hart, giving him a healthy dose of his own sexual harassment medicine. Being a country gal, she’s a rodeo star of a boss, lassoing and hogtying him when he politely and repeatedly refuses her inappropriate advances. I always wonder what men thought of this scene when it came out back in 1980. Surely, it would make for great- if not entertaining- training material for HR sexual harassment requirements.

images-6

 

Violet waxes Snow White for a mock Disney spin on her twist of revenge. She may look the spitting image of Snow White, even down to the animated woodland creatures hovering nearby, but Violet’s fairy tale turns ‘Grimm’ as she poisons Hart in her fantasy. Classic slapstick shtick includes a metal spoon eaten away instantaneously by stirring poison and steam in the shape of skull and crossbones. Ultimately, all three land up fulfilling their fantasies to a certain degree. Judy fires (although misses) a gun at Hart. Doralee hogties Hart. And Violet pours poison (accidentally) into Hart’s coffee.

Words, Words, Words:

I think the writers had fun with this one.

+The main characters’ names were somewhat similar to their respective actors, i.e. Violet= Lily (Tomlin).

+Dabney Coleman’s Frank Hart has no heart.

+In 9 to 5, the company’s name is “Consolidated Industries” which I immediately drew a parallel to the dysfunctional office relations in Billy Wilder’s THE APARTMENT (1960), with the company name of, “Consolidated Life of NY.” Likely a mere coincidence of a common word with no connection whatsoever, but that’s how a movie fanatic’s brain works.

+As words go, the 9 to 5 theme song, written and performed by Dolly Parton, became a number 1 hit (Billboard Country Chart), earning Parton an Academy Award nomination, four Grammy Award nominations with two Grammy wins.

+I think my favorite line came from Dolly Parton’s Doralee. At one point when she’s pushed to her limit with Hart’s wolfish behavior, she threatens him. She says she has a loaded gun in her purse and tells him, “turn you from rooster to a hen, with one shot!” as she points directly to his crotch.

Cast:

images-7

The casting is superb. The lead actresses clearly worked well together because that’s apparent on the screen. This was Dolly Parton’s first theatrical feature debut and I think it was the perfect vehicle for her. Tomlin and Fonda were much more experienced on-screen and their comedic chemistry still clicks to this day. The two co-star in the highly amusing and popular show “Grace and Frankie,” currently enjoying its 3rd season release on Netflix.

Coleman was the perfect choice for Frank Hart. Coleman was at the top of his fame with a string of successful features in the early eighties. He excelled at playing scoundrels with a flair for comedy. Many claim this was one of his most memorable roles. There are solid character actors here, as well, including Elizabeth Wilson, Marian Mercer, Peggy Pope, Henry Jones, Richard Stahl, plus a nice cameo from Sterling Hayden as the big boss, Tinsworthy.

If you haven’t seen this film in a long time, I recommend you take another look with fresh eyes. The comedy structure plays like so many of the classics. Look past the outdated styles and technologies, but ponder the bigger question on equality in the workplace. Has it changed so much in these nearly four decades? Isn’t there still a glass ceiling for most and continued unequal pay for equal work? But don’t let that get you down. It simply means we have more progress to accomplish. In the meantime, cherish those friendships- they can be empowering.


This was my contribution to the Workplace in Film & TV Blogathon, hosted by Moon In Gemini, August 18-20, 2017. Follow her site for daily updates with all the participating writers.

workplace1

She Kills Her Husband Once but THE POSTMAN ALWAYS RINGS TWICE, 1946

The postman always rings twice doesn’t refer to a mail carrier’s methodology of delivery in this 1946 film noir directed by Tay Garnett, starring John Garfield and Lana Turner. This is film noir, friends, so we are addressing the subject of dark and dirty crime. Not just any crime but murder. Mariticide, to be exact.

Screen Shot 2017-07-19 at 5.48.43 PM

Mariticide is the act of killing one’s husband. Not exactly a new concept in film noir. As a matter of fact, many parallels can be drawn between this film and Billy Wilder’s DOUBLE INDEMNITY (1944). In THE POSTMAN ALWAYS RINGS TWICE (1946), the title alludes (spoilers ahead!) not to the beginning fiery heat of two lovers, not to the detailed steps of planning the murder of a spouse, but moreso to the aftermath and ironic justice in how this ill-fated romance ends.

Screen Shot 2017-07-19 at 5.41.53 PM

Many crime stories and film noirs focus on the tension, motivation and players that lead up to or explain the crime. While THE POSTMAN ALWAYS RINGS TWICE (1946) does a marvelous job in that arena, a good chunk of the story focuses on good ole karma that comes along not on the first ring, but on that second ding. I’ll save those scrumptious details for you to savor when you watch the film.

Before I get ahead of myself, let’s start at the beginning and chat about the sparks that brought this doomed couple of criminal lovers together. John Garfield as Frank Chambers is perfection as the casual drifter who floats in to the Twin Oaks roadside diner on a breeze. Actually, he wanders in via hitchhiking with the local district attorney (who lives closeby and will become a key factor in his undoing) and is soon greeted by the local motorcycle cop who is often witness in rather inconvenient ways.

Screen Shot 2017-07-19 at 5.40.13 PM

He soon meets Nick Smith (Cecil Kellaway), owner of the cafe, and they quickly conduct a job interview via on-the-spot character reads. Note: we will discover later that Nick fails miserably at both job interviews and character assessments. After Frank confidently and casually pushes his loosely tied commitment for the position, Nick dashes off to greet a gas customer outside as Frank is introduced to his platinum blonde doom aka Mrs. Smith inside. We meet Lana Turner as Cora Smith in a memorable character debut where the camera follows her from her ‘accidental’ lipstick drop and roll to the slow pan up her legs to her petite frame in iconic ivory shorts, crop top and turbin.

Screen Shot 2017-07-19 at 5.41.31 PM

Screen Shot 2017-07-19 at 5.43.19 PM

The heat and tension is palatable from the very first exchange. Frank wastes no time in making his move. But first, and what plays out as a very interesting foreshadowing, is the power struggle gauntlet is thrown down upon their very initial exchange- over lipstick, no doubt. Before their first first kiss, which Frank plants boldly and rather assumedly, Frank issues the challenge of who is in charge. Cora plays her best game of sexy meets coy to lure Frank close to the flame via handing her the fiery red lipstick. But watch Frank pause, lean back and challenge Cora to come to him. She succumbs allowing Frank to think this was his game. But is it? This initial exchange was the true precursor and warning for them both.

Screen Shot 2017-07-19 at 5.50.37 PM

Screen Shot 2017-07-19 at 6.22.44 PM

Through a botched attempt to run away, Cora symbolically morphs from pristine and crisp white to dirty, sweaty, and dusty hitchhiker as she has a change of heart. This is not how she planned. They go back. Narrowly escaping Nick’s discovery, Frank has an opening to leave. But as countless film noir anti-heroes eventually do, he ignores any instinct to do the right thing. Frank: “Right then, I shoulda walked outta that place… She had me licked and she knew it.”

After initial and seeming resistence, we later learn that she was actually the one strategically in charge all along. And he acted helpless in acting better on his own behalf. Once the hooks were firmly embedded deep, even the red flag of ‘if you truly love me, you’ll murder for me’ couldn’t stop her quest to fulfill her ambitious needs to “be somebody.” Cora challenges Frank: “Do you love me? Do you love me so much that nothing else matters?”

Screen Shot 2017-07-19 at 6.44.49 PM

Watching this trainwreck of an excuse for love unfold, as the audience we see the red flags, the road signs of dangerous curves up ahead… everywhere. From our lofty tower of wisdom, we see the mistakes, the grave errors in judgement. While this film spends a good chunk of time and detail serving justice post-mariticide in an ironic twist of fate for these two with a one-two punch, the fascinating components remain the motivations and evolutions of behavior.

Why this film remains a classic, besides enjoying the sexual tension sizzle off the screen and the nail-biting moments of thrills and suspense, what keeps us riveted as the voyeurs to this obsessive, dysfunctional romance is the undercurrent of self questioning, playing out in our own hearts and heads of how obsession can turn oneself against their own morality. Where is that line drawn? What does it take to push someone over the edge? This film ultimately begs the question: if a smart, non-commitment, non-romantic type like Frank can fall into such a deep, tragic trap, could something like this happen to anyone? Yes, perhaps even you?

I think that is what is at the heart of THE POSTMAN ALWAYS RINGS TWICE (1946). Even the sharpest cynic can blunder and fall prey. Not that murder is a very likely result, but I wager to guess that a significant number of people have experienced a type of obsessive love that has altered their judgement in morality, which was not in their own best interests. So, let that mail courier ring your doorbell twice, even three times. But watch out for the Lana Turner cunning beauties of the roadside cafes. More importantly, watch out for the little voice in your heart and head whenever you hear it crying out “NO!!” – sometimes it’s important to listen.

Screen Shot 2017-07-19 at 5.58.32 PM


This post was my contribution to the ‘Til Death Us Do Part Blogathon on CineMaven’s Essays From The Couch. As this is sure to be a rousing assembly of blog posts of spouse-murdering twist and turns, I encourage you to read all the other contributors!

 

 

 

Character Actors Spotlighted on TCM in April! #WhatACharacter

TCM pays tribute to Character Actors in April. As you know, my cinematic cohorts Aurora of Once Upon A Screen & Paula of Paula’s Cinema Club and yours truly have been expressing our love of character actors for the past 5 years in our own way. Aurora explains it best here:

Once upon a screen...

If there’s one thing classic movie fans share without question it’s a love and appreciation for character actors. This is why I’ve no doubt there’s a lot of excitement in the air about TCM’s April schedule when the Star of the Month will be actors who delight in supporting roles.

Robert Osborne wrote his last column for TCM’s Now Playing Guide for April and if that had to be the case then I’m glad it’s an homage to character actors. These working people, as I often think of them, go unheralded far too often. Having Robert send out the initial call to arms is appropriate.

You should know that the featured players scheduled on TCM every Tuesday and Thursday throughout April are some of the better known names among character actors. Still, I think spotlighting their work will allow for discussion about other favorites among the legion of actors who made movies better simply…

View original post 599 more words

31 Days of Oscar Blogathon – Day 3!

UPDATED: Our final day of the 31 Days Of Oscar Blogathon, with a fresh crop of bloggers to cap off our event!

Paula's Cinema Club

The truth of the matter is that while Hollywood admires people who win Oscars, it employs people who make money, and to be able to do one does not necessarily mean you can do the other.
— George Sanders

george-and-zsazsa-oscar-night-1951-600w George Sanders and Zsa Zsa Gabor on Oscar night, 1951. Sanders won Best Supporting Actor for his work as Addison DeWitt in ALL ABOUT EVE.

Today is the third and final day of the 31 Days of Oscar Blogathon, our annual exploration of the phenomenon that is the Academy Awards, still the pinnacle of achievement in the film world. I’m keeping this introduction brief in order to avoid the dreaded wrap-up music, but be sure to check out Day 1, hosted by Aurora at Once Upon A Screen, and Day 2, hosted by Kellee at Outspoken and Freckled. It has been my honor to share five years of Oscar…

View original post 164 more words

31 DAYS OF OSCAR BLOGATHON- Day 2

hattie-1

Taking the baton from fellow co-host Aurora of Once Upon A Screen, who brought us the initial round of blogger contributions yesterday, today I pick up on the second day of the 31 Days Of Oscar Blogathon. Paula of Paula’s Cinema Club will pick up the final day tomorrow. Explore all three days for three days for the best in the blogger biz for everything Oscar.

Just a reminder, this is our 5th year hosting this event in conjunction with Turner Classic Movies network’s month-long event to honor the Academy’s Oscars. TCM is showcasing this year’s special programming in alpha order. Click here for more info: TCM’s 31 Days Of Oscar

Now, onto today’s lineup!

Pop Culture Pundit takes a look at the brilliance of PURPLE RAIN: A Traditional Musical With an Anti-Traditional Score.

CineMaven’s Essays From The Couch presents Jeff Lundenberger as guest blogger as he goes deep in the Best Actress field of 1950 with, And The Winner Is…

Charlene’s (Mostly) Classic Movie Reviews discusses the beauty and bleakness of existence in The Diving Bell and Butterfly (2007)

Wolffian Classic Movies Digest explores the unforgettable oblique angles and visual styles of Cinematography in THE THIRD MAN.

Weegie Midget swoops in for a caped landing with Best Actor Oscar Winners in Superhero Movies!

Blogged Of The Darned enjoys life’s banquet in 3 Beekman Place- The Art Direction/ Set Design of AUNTIE MAME. I promise you won’t starve to death when reading this one.

I will continue to add more posts later today so check back for more blogger bliss! And to all the participating writers and readers alike, Aurora, Paula and I cannot THANK YOU enough for your continuing support!

…Kellee

oscars

 

 

 

 

#31DaysOfOscar Blogathon – Day 1

Co-host Aurora of Once Upon A Screen kicks off our first day of 31 DAYS OF OSCAR BLOGATHON!

Once upon a screen...

Today we begin the three-day roll-call from Oscars past and present. Day 1 brings you music, a legendary movie and TV actress, an epic and Henry Fonda among other things. Not too shabby a way to kick things off in our fifth consecutive 31 Days of Oscar Blogathon.

oscars

Thanks to the bloggers who’re participating in this year’s celebration and to all those who’ll visit. Of course I must also thank Kellee of Outspoken & Freckled and Paula of Paula’s Cinema Club for allowing me to co-host once again. They’re true blue and enjoyable partners in crime.

Before we get to the first day’s entries you might want to read the original announcement post for specifics. Also, be sure to tune in to TCM all month for their alphabetized 31 Days of Oscar marathon, which makes it easy to find favorites or yet-to-be-seen gems. And of course, tune in the 89th…

View original post 273 more words

5th annual 31 DAYS OF OSCAR BLOGATHON!

primerosganadores_oscar-preview

Welcome to the 31 Days of Oscars Blogathon redux for the fourth time, making this the fifth installment of our grand celebration of all things Oscar.

31-days
Aurora of Once Upon A Screen, Paula of Paula’s Cinema Club and yours truly, Kellee of Outspoken & Freckled started this event to coincide with Turner Classic Movies’ 31 Days of Oscar marathon. For 31 days TCM spotlights the movies and players that have made a legend of the golden statuette and this blogathon is our way to pay tribute to the network and the movies we love. We hope you join us in the effort.

Rather than hosting the 31 Days of Oscar Blogathon for the entire month of February, as we’ve done in the past, we will host all entries the weekend before the Oscars this year. That is from Friday, February 17 through Sunday, February 19, which leaves Oscar weekend free for last-minute movie-watching. We’re also combining all topics this year and simply presenting them over the three days. Any Oscar-related topic is fair game. We are not limiting this event to classic film fare as we’d like to see entries covering the entire 89-year history of Oscar, including this year’s nominees. To help get you motivated here are the categories we’ve used in the past…

-The Actors
-The Directors
-The Motion Pictures
-Oscar Snubs
-The Crafts (music, costumes, etc.)
-New Idea – Oscar Controversies
Most of you know the drill, but as a reminder, adhering to the following would be appreciated:

Let us know what your desired topic is by leaving a comment on any of the host blogs.
Include the title and link to your blog in the comments area.
Advise if you have a date preference – Friday 2/17, Saturday 2/18 or Sunday 2/19
Include the event banner on your blog and in the entry post to help us promote the event.
Restrictions – just two:

-Please do not submit previously published posts
-No duplicates to ensure we cover as much of the Oscars as possible
We look forward to hearing from you and to reading your entries. As many entries as you want, actually, so get to it!

Until then, here’s to Oscar, to TCM and to YOU!

Happy blogging…

NOTE: Starting on February 1st TCM will feature Oscar winners and nominees in alphabetical order, which should make it easy to set your DVRs favorites. Be sure to check out the schedule. The Oscars will be broadcast live on Sunday, February 26 on ABC.

Participating Blogs & Chosen Topics:

Thoughts All Sorts – The Piano (1993)

Phyllis Loves Classic Movies – Timeline of Award-winning costumes (1961 to 1977)

Once Upon a Screen – The Horror of Oscar

Wolffian Classic Movies Digest – Cinematography in The Third Man (1949)

In the Good Old Days of Classic Hollywood – Judith Anderson’s Snub for Rebecca (1940)

The Old Hollywood Garden – 1943 Best Actress Nominees

Once Upon a Screen – Conrad L. Hall and Cinematography in Road to Perdition (2002)

Cinematic Scribblings – Day for Night (1973)

4 Star Films – (Some) Nominated actors who never won an Oscar
LI.Oscars.6.0224.DC

%d bloggers like this: