Last Non Western You Watched

Scrooge 1951 version, my fav

Last night I watched "Chinatown" with Jack Nicholson and Faye Dunaway. Hard to believe - I'm a hardcore movie fan, as I'm sure you've guessed, and yet this was the first time I had ever seen that movie.

I don't remember why I've avoided watching it in the past but I discovered that it was my loss because it's a great movie, with wonderful performances by all players, excellent direction by Polanski, and an Oscar-winning screenplay.

Chinatown is a great Movie.
My last one was Chaos a nice time-waster action thriller.

My next movies will be Pork Chop Hill and Bonny & Clyde. Two classics I've not watched before.

Quote from JohnChisum

My next movies will be Pork Chop Hill and Bonny & Clyde. Two classics I've not watched before.

I think you'll like both of 'em - they're both pretty good movies, though I think the acting by all concerned is better in "Bonnie & Clyde". IMO, the only "natural" acting individual in "Pork Chop Hill" was by Gregory Peck.

Quote from Stumpy

I think you'll like both of 'em - they're both pretty good movies, though I think the acting by all concerned is better in "Bonnie & Clyde". IMO, the only "natural" acting individual in "Pork Chop Hill" was by Gregory Peck.

Just finished Pork Chop Hill which I liked a lot. Gregory Peck was good but there were some other familiar faces in minor roles (George Peppard, Henry Dean Stanton, Woody Strode, Martin Landau ...)
Will continue soon with Bonnie & Clyde :teeth_smile:

Last night my friends and I had a long over due movie night and we watch Charlie Bartlet, Young Frankenstein, and Quite Man all of which were enjoy very much

Continuing with the pirate theme . . . we watched Pirates of the Caribbean, Curse of the Black Pearl a couple of nights ago. That makes about the fourth or fifth time watching it, though it's been long enough since the last time that it was a pleasant experience.

Last night, we watched the latest episodes of Monk and Castle (yeah, I know, they're not movies, but they're not Westerns, either).

Chester

Just finished "Pirates of the Caribbean - at World's End" - wild and crazy story!

Turtles Forever a crossover of the 80's Ninja Turtles cartoon and the 2003 series.

Hi

The Story of Mankind. I think that along with the Conqueror it was billed as one of the worst films ever made. But when I saw it around the late fifties I thought it was brilliant an all star cast led by Ronald Coleman in one of or possibly his last film and Vincent Price as the devil. It must have been made on the cheap as the put inserts of films from cowboys to pirates.


Regards

Arthur

Last night I watched another of Jack Nicholson's movies which I had heretofore avoided. Anyway, I remember when "Five Easy Pieces" was first released back in the Seventies, it got rave reviews from all the critics. I don't know why as I thought the plot itself stunk.

It's true that Nicholson's acting and that of his co-star Karen Black was above par but the story itself was about two people who led a very rootless life. Since this movie was released shortly after the Sixties (the decade of youth rebellion and advent of left-wing activism), I can understand why a movie that basically celebrates rebellion against traditional values was popular with the Hollywood crowd. As we know, they are the people who have been in the forefront of rebelling against long-held traditions.

Yesterday evening I watched "Airport", 1970's precursor to a long line of disaster movies. Based on Arthur Hailey's bestselling book, it featured many of Hollywood's finest: Burt Lancaster, Dean Martin, Van Heflin, George Kennedy, Jacqueline Bisset and several others.

Enthralling plot, as Burt, who plays the general manager of a major airport, tries unsuccessfully to balance his job responsibilities with his home life. Meanwhile, Van Heflin is plotting to commit suicide by detonating a bomb on a Rome-bound flight. Edge-of-your-seat thriller.

Quote from Stumpy

Yesterday evening I watched "Airport", 1970's precursor to a long line of disaster movies. Based on Arthur Hailey's bestselling book, it featured many of Hollywood's finest: Burt Lancaster, Dean Martin, Van Heflin, George Kennedy, Jacqueline Bisset and several others.

Enthralling plot, as Burt, who plays the general manager of a major airport, tries unsuccessfully to balance his job responsibilities with his home life. Meanwhile, Van Heflin is plotting to commit suicide by detonating a bomb on a Rome-bound flight. Edge-of-your-seat thriller.

That was one of my favorite movies back then!!

But back to the present . . . tonight we rented and watched the new Star Trek movie, and really enjoyed it very much! Chester says he thinks some of those scenes, that so artfully merged the original Star Trek with the current movie, probably had hard-core Trekkies practically peeing in their pants in excitement.

Mrs. C

Only DvD watching these days as we have no cable--yet and my TV is older than any by just a few onths that cant get TV broadcasts thanks to those stupid BAS___DS in congress passing that stupid law.

Anyway, I saw: The Bridges At Toko-Ri (last cable movie I watched before start of move) The Land That Time Forgot/The People That Forgot/ The Bridge At Remagen and am partially through: Battle of the Bulge.

Having seen a preview a few months ago for the movie Is Anybody There? with Michael Caine, and thinking it looked pretty interesting, the Mrs. rented it. I'm sorry to say it was quite disappointing (the Mrs. was equally disappointed). I've never felt I needed sub-titles more than in this English speaking movie (those subtitles were NOT available!). It was hard to hear or understand what was being said, even with the volume way up. The story ran pretty slow, and there were a few totally unnecessary uses of bad language that also marred the film.

Can't say that I'd recommend it.

Chester

This evening I've been watching (though not continuously) one of those wonderful "costume" epics of the Thirties starring the King of Swashbucklers and two wonderful actresses from the Golden Years.

I'm referring, of course, to that handsome devil Errol Flynn, Bette Davis and Olivia de Havilland in "The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex". Why, oh why, don't they make these kind of movies anymore instead of the garbage they turn out nowadays?

Recently I was reading viewer posts about some movie on IMDB and this one particular post I read captured perfectly my sentiments about today's films and those who are so thrilled by them. I'm gonna see if I can find that viewer post and re-post it here to see how many other JWMB members agree with its' sentiments.

This is the IMDB viewer post to which I referred previously. IMO, this person nails today's movies (and their enthusiasts) dead-on. Anyone else agree? The underlined portions I added for emphasis.

"It amuses me how easily many here can offer condemnation of this film. If you condemn it by reason that it doesn't capture the viewer in a way that say The Maltese Falcon or Vertigo did then perhaps I can understand.

It seems however that most of the harsh words are coming from the youngsters without much desire to even know what real films were like. I suppose it's not entirely their fault. I mean an action film to them has to involve no less than 55% CGI effects, 25% scantily clad, or outright nude actresses, oh! and more times than not a totally unrealistic plot.

But you see many years back in the early 70s and beyond they didn't have CGI to make up for lacking plots and poor acting. And at that point and time you couldn't really show full nudity so you couldn't rack them into theaters that way either (note the first scene with the lovely Miss. Bissett where she emerges from the shower and barely flashes just the side of her breast. That was probably pretty racy for the time).

So since you can't have any cheap outs like you can today, Gee Whiz! you had to have a real plot and have the ability to act! Lancaster has always been a favorite and he did act very well in this film. Youngsters see the likes of Dean Martin and George Kennedy and don't know what to think because all they've ever known was a Hollywood that produces computer generated fluff. Frankly guys if your idea of an action movie is watching Speed then you need to widen your horizon (no offense to the great Dennis Hopper).

Airport was not as in depth as the book, this is true. Seldom will you find a screenplay to be written with the same depth. Do you know why? Because you can't make the film last for 9 hours!

I know this is more a rebuttal that an outright review of the movie, but it amazes me how some of the CGI junkies have room to talk when it comes to offering their disdain for films with some of the most historic actors in history. This movie is totally entertaining and works well. And the idea some whine because it may not be 'PC' by today's standards is nothing more than extremist liberal drivel. Dino womanizing is apparently an offensive no-no. But today you can show something 50 times as bad and because its more modern and allegedly more acceptable by this standard, no one blinks. Amazing."

I know it will come as a surprise to many of today's young moviegoers but prior to about 1970, thousands of great movies were made without profanity, sex or gratuitous violence.

Quote from Stumpy

This is the IMDB viewer post to which I referred previously. IMO, this person nails today's movies (and their enthusiasts) dead-on. Anyone else agree? The underlined portions I added for emphasis.

"It amuses me how easily many here can offer condemnation of this film. If you condemn it by reason that it doesn't capture the viewer in a way that say The Maltese Falcon or Vertigo did then perhaps I can understand.

It seems however that most of the harsh words are coming from the youngsters without much desire to even know what real films were like. I suppose it's not entirely their fault. I mean an action film to them has to involve no less than 55% CGI effects, 25% scantily clad, or outright nude actresses, oh! and more times than not a totally unrealistic plot.

But you see many years back in the early 70s and beyond they didn't have CGI to make up for lacking plots and poor acting. And at that point and time you couldn't really show full nudity so you couldn't rack them into theaters that way either (note the first scene with the lovely Miss. Bissett where she emerges from the shower and barely flashes just the side of her breast. That was probably pretty racy for the time).

So since you can't have any cheap outs like you can today, Gee Whiz! you had to have a real plot and have the ability to act! Lancaster has always been a favorite and he did act very well in this film. Youngsters see the likes of Dean Martin and George Kennedy and don't know what to think because all they've ever known was a Hollywood that produces computer generated fluff. Frankly guys if your idea of an action movie is watching Speed then you need to widen your horizon (no offense to the great Dennis Hopper).

Airport was not as in depth as the book, this is true. Seldom will you find a screenplay to be written with the same depth. Do you know why? Because you can't make the film last for 9 hours!

I know this is more a rebuttal that an outright review of the movie, but it amazes me how some of the CGI junkies have room to talk when it comes to offering their disdain for films with some of the most historic actors in history. This movie is totally entertaining and works well. And the idea some whine because it may not be 'PC' by today's standards is nothing more than extremist liberal drivel. Dino womanizing is apparently an offensive no-no. But today you can show something 50 times as bad and because its more modern and allegedly more acceptable by this standard, no one blinks. Amazing."

I know it will come as a surprise to many of today's young moviegoers but prior to about 1970, thousands of great movies were made without profanity, sex or gratuitous violence.

Display More

I agree whole heartedly, I wish more movies were made without graphic violence, bloodletting, sex, nudity, ETC. It would be wonderful to go to the theater and not worry about what surprises may lie lurking in the film.

This evening I watched "The Untouchables", which I personally feel is one of Kevin Costner's best roles as Elliot Ness, the incorruptible federal agent who managed to send Chicago mobster Al Capone to prison. He had a wonderful supporting cast, including Sean Connery and Robert DeNiro.