Why don't people watch films?

[anynameyouwish]

I love this movie! It's heartbreakingly beautiful. It's Borgnine's best performance of his career, imo.

It doesn't take a 100 million dollars and the top stars to make a good movie. All it takes is a good story, a good script, capable actors, and good direction to produce a movie that will bring a tear to the eyes of viewers and put a smile on their face as they walk out of the door. And Marty did just that.

"Marty" is a 1953 television play by Paddy Chayefsky. It was telecast live in May 1953, on The Philco Television Playhouse. Rod Steiger was in title role as Marty.

Loved the movie and still watch it on occasion BUT......

the scenes with his ancient mother and her sister talking abut how OLD they are.....

turns out they are only 55!

That sure was a different time.

It doesn't take a 100 million dollars and the top stars to make a good movie. All it takes is a good story, a good script, capable actors, and good direction to produce a movie that will bring a tear to the eyes of viewers and put a smile on their face as they walk out of the door. And Marty did just that.

"Marty" is a 1953 television play by Paddy Chayefsky. It was telecast live in May 1953, on The Philco Television Playhouse. Rod Steiger was in title role as Marty.

Loved the movie and still watch it on occasion BUT......

the scenes with his ancient mother and her sister talking abut how OLD they are.....

turns out they are only 55!

That sure was a different time.

In 50's 55 was consider old, not like today.

I only wish Hollywood would turn out more movies like this one with simple themes, good scripts, and actors that make their characters come alive. Too many movies rely on CGI and star power which results in cardboard characters that become incidental to the story and special effects.

One movie I saw some years ago was certainly the exception. Tender Mercies staring Robert Duvall released in 1983. It had a limited release, due to a poor test screening and it generally failed at the box office but was praised by critics and received 5 academy award nominations including best picture. Duvall considered it one his best pictures.

Duvall plays a washed up, alcoholic country singer, who awakens at a run-down Texas roadside motel and gas station after a night of heavy drinking. He meets the owner a young widow and her son, who offers him work in exchange for a room. The film encompasses several different themes, including the importance of love and family, salvation, and recovery.

Hear hear! This is why I prefer old movies. The script were better, the actors could act, and they knew how to pace the story. No cheap reliance on special effects - except for the obvious horror and scifi movies.

Even the horror/ghost stories (many of them) didn't use much special effects; they allowed your own imagination to fill in the blanks!

Probably one of the most horrifying ghost stories, I have every seen is "The Innocents", released in 1961 starring Debora Kerr. It is a high-quality spine-chilling drama adapted from Henry Jame's, "Turn of the Screw". The plot follows a governess who watches over two children and comes to fear that their large estate is haunted by ghosts and that the children are being possessed. You are never quite sure whether the supernatural phenomenon are just a product of the mind or they are real. What makes it so terrifying is the evil is coming through the innocence of children.

I am not familiar with that one.

I'll check it out

 

[sealybobo]

Why I watch them to be honest is the story and actors of the past

I agree, it fascinating to see the fictionalized account of the past. It's of course fiction but it gives us a view of how people saw the world, attitudes, dress, and often many things that no longer exist. One period movie that comes to mind that does all of the above is, Orson Welles's "The Magnificent Ambersons" adapted form Booth Tarkington's Pulitzer winning novel. It is about a wealthy family at the turn of the 20th century that lives in a golden world, almost one of memory and then it shows what it turns into as fortunes of an automobile entrepreneur rises and the family falls. It is regarded as one of the best US films ever made. The movie is unique in so many ways. Credits are spoken by an off-screen voice and not shown printed on screen. The movie begins with a short introduction to fashions of the times. Welles uses the camera angle to set mood intertwined with the musical theme. It is truly one of the best period pieces every put on film. It's well worth a view.

The next movie will be Westward the women. A tough trail guide takes a large group of mail order brides across the plains to California. Robert Taylor.

 

[Flopper]

Next movie A big hand for the little lady. Henry Fonda, Joanne Woodward, Burgess Meredith, Jason Robards, Paul Ford, Charles bickford.

I’m not sure I know who the last three are.

And I know the name Joanne woodward but can’t say what movies I’ve ever seen her in

Saw it. Every entertaining.

Joan Woodward was Paul Neuman's wife
Three Faces of Eve
The Long Hot Summer
From the Terrace
A Big Hand for the Little Lady

Way too many to list.

 

[Flopper]

Why I watch them to be honest is the story and actors of the past

I agree, it fascinating to see the fictionalized account of the past. It's of course fiction but it gives us a view of how people saw the world, attitudes, dress, and often many things that no longer exist. One period movie that comes to mind that does all of the above is, Orson Welles's "The Magnificent Ambersons" adapted form Booth Tarkington's Pulitzer winning novel. It is about a wealthy family at the turn of the 20th century that lives in a golden world, almost one of memory and then it shows what it turns into as fortunes of an automobile entrepreneur rises and the family falls. It is regarded as one of the best US films ever made. The movie is unique in so many ways. Credits are spoken by an off-screen voice and not shown printed on screen. The movie begins with a short introduction to fashions of the times. Welles uses the camera angle to set mood intertwined with the musical theme. It is truly one of the best period pieces every put on film. It's well worth a view.

The next movie will be Westward the women. A tough trail guide takes a large group of mail order brides across the plains to California. Robert Taylor.

I really enjoyed. Very different.

 

[Flopper]

Something that you classic movie fans may not know is that are many films that are in public domain. That means their copyright has expired and anyone with a copy of the movie can post it on the Internet for streaming or downloading. There may be a small fee or it may be free. Some of the movies are real classics such as "It's a Wonderful Live" an others are a waste of time to watch.

The following is a link that list a number of films with expired copyrights. The actual number is much much larger. There is no complete list.
List of films in the public domain in the United States - Wikipedia

Here is a website with 30 classic films you can watch for free. I watched one of two and the film quality was good. There are some real gems on this website.

30 Hollywood Classics Streaming for Free in the Public Domain

 

[ralfy]

Overexposure to commercial mass entertainment.

 

[sealybobo]

Overexposure to commercial mass entertainment.

We do see today kids have a shorter attention span than we do. They can’t sit through one of these long slow movies that don’t have special effects.

 

[boedicca]

Next movie A big hand for the little lady. Henry Fonda, Joanne Woodward, Burgess Meredith, Jason Robards, Paul Ford, Charles bickford.

I’m not sure I know who the last three are.

And I know the name Joanne woodward but can’t say what movies I’ve ever seen her in

Joanne was married to Paul Newman - they had a long and happy marriage. Her best known movies are "Three Faces of Eve" are "Long Hot Summer". I really love her in "Rachel, Rachel" - quirky and quite lovely movie.

 

[Flopper]

Overexposure to commercial mass entertainment.

We do see today kids have a shorter attention span than we do. They can’t sit through one of these long slow movies that don’t have special effects.

That they do. So many single parent homes and homes with two parents who are seldom at home leaves kids without supervisor or direction. They don't read anything and don't watch anything but mindless sitcoms and action adventures movies. The rest of their time is spent playing video games.

 

[Flopper]

Next movie A big hand for the little lady. Henry Fonda, Joanne Woodward, Burgess Meredith, Jason Robards, Paul Ford, Charles bickford.

I’m not sure I know who the last three are.

And I know the name Joanne woodward but can’t say what movies I’ve ever seen her in

Joanne was married to Paul Newman - they had a long and happy marriage. Her best known movies are "Three Faces of Eve" are "Long Hot Summer". I really love her in "Rachel, Rachel" - quirky and quite lovely movie.

Both excellent movies. A Big Hand for the Little Lady was a fun movie.

 

[sealybobo]

Next movie A big hand for the little lady. Henry Fonda, Joanne Woodward, Burgess Meredith, Jason Robards, Paul Ford, Charles bickford.

I’m not sure I know who the last three are.

And I know the name Joanne woodward but can’t say what movies I’ve ever seen her in

Joanne was married to Paul Newman - they had a long and happy marriage. Her best known movies are "Three Faces of Eve" are "Long Hot Summer". I really love her in "Rachel, Rachel" - quirky and quite lovely movie.

Both excellent movies. A Big Hand for the Little Lady was a fun movie.

Garbo is going to have to wait. I’m watching mutiny on the bounty. Not the Mel Gibson one I’m watching the one with marlon Brando

 

[sealybobo]

I don’t understand why they didn’t take 5 prostitutes with them on mutiny on the bounty. Promise each prostitute a sum of money when they get back to port.

This would make the voyage much more pleasurable

 

[Flopper]

Next movie A big hand for the little lady. Henry Fonda, Joanne Woodward, Burgess Meredith, Jason Robards, Paul Ford, Charles bickford.

I’m not sure I know who the last three are.

And I know the name Joanne woodward but can’t say what movies I’ve ever seen her in

Joanne was married to Paul Newman - they had a long and happy marriage. Her best known movies are "Three Faces of Eve" are "Long Hot Summer". I really love her in "Rachel, Rachel" - quirky and quite lovely movie.

Both excellent movies. A Big Hand for the Little Lady was a fun movie.

Garbo is going to have to wait. I’m watching mutiny on the bounty. Not the Mel Gibson one I’m watching the one with marlon Brando

Brando was good and the color made the movie spectacular. However, the 1935 version was a better movie. Charles Laughton will always be Captain Bligh.

 

[Flopper]

I don’t understand why they didn’t take 5 prostitutes with them on mutiny on the bounty. Promise each prostitute a sum of money when they get back to port.

This would make the voyage much more pleasurable

Generally women weren't welcome on working vessels in the 17th century for several reasons. They were a distraction. Fights would breakout and the women would have to be protected. Folklore is that women on board are a bad omen.

 

[Pogo]

Why don't people specifically watch more old films? I love them myself.

I've decided to choose two, one a perhaps little known, but wonderful British murder/mystery film from 1952 "Mr. Denning Drives North". It's okay the link doesn't give any of plot away:

Mr. Denning Drives North - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here's the full film, 1 hour 27 minutes:



Then as I love Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce, as Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson. I think "Sherlock Holmes and The House of Fear" from 1945 is excellent and very atmospheric.

Here's the full film, 1 hour 9 minutes:



If you watch these films, hopefully you'll like them.

I've never ever cared for films. I think it's generally a waste of time and for the most part a bunch of rubbish, at least the Hollyweird crapola.

True story: I once lived with a couple who watched films almost constantly except on Thursdays when they chanted (they were Buddhists). And they'd run their TV at screaming volume that made it impossible to tune out anywhere in the house. From that experience, hearing the constant barrage of sounds without watching the video, I concluded that Hollyweird movies consist of three basic elements, repeated and rotated over and over, for the duration of the film. These are:

1. Explosions and gunshots
2. Car chases and crashes
3. Women screaming

I just need something deeper than that.

And if a film is based on a book invariably it doesn't do justice to the story, because it can't.

Perhaps a film has the same limitations a TV set has --- it makes you sit in one spot and shut up and then dictates every sensory input, dictates what the characters look like, how they talk, what the scenery looks like, and you end up ingesting a visual artifact instead of a story --- as opposed to the printed page where those characters, those scenes, those nuances are left up to your own imagination. It lets the brain breathe.

About once every ten years somebody takes me out to a movie for my birthday. The last one was Borat. But I dug it.

 

[Pogo]

I don't particularly watch ooo..lll...dddd films, but I do miss GOOD films. They are seldom made these days. Once in awhile I will go to the trouble of checking the lists in XOD ... and there's not a damned thing worth watching. The last time I looked, there was only one listing ... for "Woman in Gold" which was an excellent movie. The rest were all weird, evil aliens, blood and guts, or blood spewing chainsaw crap ... and I have to wonder. Now it appears that the continuing love affair with Charles Manson is about to be aired on TV.

Even though the rest of the world has moved on to BlueRay ... I'm slowing trying to build my DVD library! LOL! I just purchased "13 Hours" on Amazon because I want to know what the hell happened over there in Benghazi from the viewpoint of the people who were there. "What difference does it make?!!" Well, to the families of those who were slaughtered ... probably a lot. Which reminds me, whatever happened to that poor soul who was hustled out of his home as the creator of "The Video" that was purportedly the cause of the Benghazi fiasco? I've not seen anything about him since he was ushered out of his home.

I don't know if we get Benghazi film in Europa, I think we should we have the Michael Moore films.

OHHHH, GOD! I refuse to watch anything Michael Moore is involved with. I can't even stand to see a picture of him. Nasty buzzard, he is.

Canadian Bacon was pretty funny.

 

[Flopper]

The Stranger, released in 1946 is good suspense story. It is the only Orson Welles movie to make profit on it's initial release. It is set in a small New England Town after WWII in which a goverment investigator is tracking down a Nazi war criminal. It was Welles least favorite of all his films. He took the job, his first directorial stint in four years, in a bid to prove he had the capacity to make something on schedule and under budget. Even when Welles makes what he considers a 2nd rate movie, it still qualifies as a good movie.

 

[Flopper]

Why don't people specifically watch more old films? I love them myself.

I've decided to choose two, one a perhaps little known, but wonderful British murder/mystery film from 1952 "Mr. Denning Drives North". It's okay the link doesn't give any of plot away:

Mr. Denning Drives North - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here's the full film, 1 hour 27 minutes:



Then as I love Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce, as Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson. I think "Sherlock Holmes and The House of Fear" from 1945 is excellent and very atmospheric.

Here's the full film, 1 hour 9 minutes:



If you watch these films, hopefully you'll like them.

I've never ever cared for films. I think it's generally a waste of time and for the most part a bunch of rubbish, at least the Hollyweird crapola.

True story: I once lived with a couple who watched films almost constantly except on Thursdays when they chanted (they were Buddhists). And they'd run their TV at screaming volume that made it impossible to tune out anywhere in the house. From that experience, hearing the constant barrage of sounds without watching the video, I concluded that Hollyweird movies consist of three basic elements, repeated and rotated over and over, for the duration of the film. These are:

1. Explosions and gunshots
2. Car chases and crashes
3. Women screaming

I just need something deeper than that.

And if a film is based on a book invariably it doesn't do justice to the story, because it can't.

Perhaps a film has the same limitations a TV set has --- it makes you sit in one spot and shut up and then dictates every sensory input, dictates what the characters look like, how they talk, what the scenery looks like, and you end up ingesting a visual artifact instead of a story --- as opposed to the printed page where those characters, those scenes, those nuances are left up to your own imagination. It lets the brain breathe.

About once every ten years somebody takes me out to a movie for my birthday. The last one was Borat. But I dug it.

There are movies that are deep. However, like all forms of entertainment movies have different goals, to make you think, to escape, to laugh, to cry, to inform, and some just to please the senses. There have been over half million movies made, from masterpieces to pieces of fluff to pure escapism, to boring wastes of time.

 

[Pogo]

Why don't people specifically watch more old films? I love them myself.

I've decided to choose two, one a perhaps little known, but wonderful British murder/mystery film from 1952 "Mr. Denning Drives North". It's okay the link doesn't give any of plot away:

Mr. Denning Drives North - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here's the full film, 1 hour 27 minutes:



Then as I love Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce, as Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson. I think "Sherlock Holmes and The House of Fear" from 1945 is excellent and very atmospheric.

Here's the full film, 1 hour 9 minutes:



If you watch these films, hopefully you'll like them.

I've never ever cared for films. I think it's generally a waste of time and for the most part a bunch of rubbish, at least the Hollyweird crapola.

True story: I once lived with a couple who watched films almost constantly except on Thursdays when they chanted (they were Buddhists). And they'd run their TV at screaming volume that made it impossible to tune out anywhere in the house. From that experience, hearing the constant barrage of sounds without watching the video, I concluded that Hollyweird movies consist of three basic elements, repeated and rotated over and over, for the duration of the film. These are:

1. Explosions and gunshots
2. Car chases and crashes
3. Women screaming

I just need something deeper than that.

And if a film is based on a book invariably it doesn't do justice to the story, because it can't.

Perhaps a film has the same limitations a TV set has --- it makes you sit in one spot and shut up and then dictates every sensory input, dictates what the characters look like, how they talk, what the scenery looks like, and you end up ingesting a visual artifact instead of a story --- as opposed to the printed page where those characters, those scenes, those nuances are left up to your own imagination. It lets the brain breathe.

About once every ten years somebody takes me out to a movie for my birthday. The last one was Borat. But I dug it.

There are movies that are deep. However, like all forms of entertainment movies have different goals, to make you think, to escape, to laugh, to cry, to inform, and some just to please the senses. There have been over half million movies made, from masterpieces to pieces of fluff to pure escapism, to boring wastes of time.

Exactly, and the mass produced majority of them are simply put out to make money for the studio and not for any kind of consideration of art. I guess I regard that with the same disdain I have for commercial music.

OP will certainly know what I'm talking about there, right Oosie?

Even your previous post about "The Stranger" notes that it's the only Orson Welles movie to make a profit. That should be irrelevant. Every time I hear _____ movie made $X gazillion at the box office I hear it as a reason to ignore it. It shouldn't be a negative reason, but it sure is not a positive.

 

[Flopper]

Why don't people specifically watch more old films? I love them myself.

I've decided to choose two, one a perhaps little known, but wonderful British murder/mystery film from 1952 "Mr. Denning Drives North". It's okay the link doesn't give any of plot away:

Mr. Denning Drives North - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here's the full film, 1 hour 27 minutes:



Then as I love Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce, as Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson. I think "Sherlock Holmes and The House of Fear" from 1945 is excellent and very atmospheric.

Here's the full film, 1 hour 9 minutes:



If you watch these films, hopefully you'll like them.

I've never ever cared for films. I think it's generally a waste of time and for the most part a bunch of rubbish, at least the Hollyweird crapola.

True story: I once lived with a couple who watched films almost constantly except on Thursdays when they chanted (they were Buddhists). And they'd run their TV at screaming volume that made it impossible to tune out anywhere in the house. From that experience, hearing the constant barrage of sounds without watching the video, I concluded that Hollyweird movies consist of three basic elements, repeated and rotated over and over, for the duration of the film. These are:

1. Explosions and gunshots
2. Car chases and crashes
3. Women screaming

I just need something deeper than that.

And if a film is based on a book invariably it doesn't do justice to the story, because it can't.

Perhaps a film has the same limitations a TV set has --- it makes you sit in one spot and shut up and then dictates every sensory input, dictates what the characters look like, how they talk, what the scenery looks like, and you end up ingesting a visual artifact instead of a story --- as opposed to the printed page where those characters, those scenes, those nuances are left up to your own imagination. It lets the brain breathe.

About once every ten years somebody takes me out to a movie for my birthday. The last one was Borat. But I dug it.

There are movies that are deep. However, like all forms of entertainment movies have different goals, to make you think, to escape, to laugh, to cry, to inform, and some just to please the senses. There have been over half million movies made, from masterpieces to pieces of fluff to pure escapism, to boring wastes of time.

Exactly, and the mass produced majority of them are simply put out to make money for the studio and not for any kind of consideration of art. I guess I regard that with the same disdain I have for commercial music.

OP will certainly know what I'm talking about there, right Oosie?

Even your previous post about "The Stranger" notes that it's the only Orson Welles movie to make a profit. That should be irrelevant. Every time I hear _____ movie made $X gazillion at the box office I hear it as a reason to ignore it. It shouldn't be a negative reason, but it sure is not a positive.

Unfortunately without the profits, there would be few if any movies. I have no problem with people making a lot of money but I certainly have a problem with talented actors, directors, and writers producing garbage simply because it's quick, easy, and profitable. Audiences and critics should come down hard on these people. Have you notice how many talented actors and actresses at the peak of their career start selling their name and not their talents. One that comes to mind is Robert De Niro who went from, "Bang the Drum Slowly", Raging Bull, Mean Streets, The Godfather, Taxi Driver, The Deer Hunter, Falling In Love, to Dirty Grandpa, The Heist, and and a slew of mediocre movies that he played supporting rolls and got top dollar. Another is Meryl Streep with a record 21 Academy Award nomiations, winning 3 and 31 Golden Globe nominations, winning eight - more nominations, and more wins than any other actor. Dustin Hoffman is another that is living off his name, The Graduate, Midnight Cowboy, Little Big Man, All President's Men, Tootsie, and Rain man and now he does Kung Foo Panda and movies thrown together in few weeks in which he makes as much as the rest of cast for putting in a couple of appearances.