Sunset Boulevard’: Billy Wilder and Charles Brackett’s Sobering Exposure of the Dark Side of Hollywood’s golden era.

So today I talk about ‘Sunset Boulevard’: Billy Wilder and Charles Brackett’s Sobering Exposure of the Dark Side of Hollywood’s golden era. i feel this subject is highly very well regarded to me. I love movies so much. It is truly marvelous as Billy Wilder is one of my favorite director-writers all time. I would love talk about this movie today.

‘Sunset Boulevard’: Billy Wilder and Charles Brackett’s Sobering Exposure of the Dark Side of Hollywood’s golden era.

You will not find in my pictures any phony camera moves or fancy setups to prove that I am a moving-picture director. My characters don’t rush around for the sake of being busy. I like to believe that movement can be achieved eloquently, elegantly, economically and logically without shooting from a hole in the ground, without hanging the camera from the chandelier and without the camera dolly dancing a polka(quote by Billy wilder) Billy Wilder and his reliable writing partner Charles Brackett, who had been called the happiest union in Hollywood, had been toying with the idea of making a film about Hollywood for a number of years. The story was originally conceived as a light-hearted comedy about a silent screen star coming out of the darkness of her obscurity to triumph over her enemies, but the storyline soon descended into a darker direction, with Wilder’s exquisite cynicism starting to dominate the theme of the project. In order to keep Paramount, their home studio, at bay, the pair chose to pretend they were actually making a piece called A Can of Beans. When Brackett and Wilder finally reached a block in their creative process, they decided to turn to reporter D. M. Marshman Jr., their frequent bridge partner and former reporter for Life, whom they brought onto the project to assist with the screenplay.

The greatness and importance of Sunset Boulevard lie not only in its technical mastery, in Brackett and Wilder’s dark but humorous script with several of the most frequently quoted lines of all time (“I am big, it’s the pictures that got small”) or even in the career-defining performances of these great actors. A good deal of the film’s value stems from its audacity: first of all, it took a lot of talent and expert maneuvering to get the film made with regard to the Production Code, especially considering the delicacy of the relationship between the two main characters of the picture. Secondly, and crucially, Sunset Boulevard was a shocking breath of fresh air when it came out thanks to the target of its arrows of cynicism. The film industry had already been a popular and successful theme of motion pictures, but never in such a dark, sobering context. Instead of making another jolly comedy or upbeat musical about the business that made him a star, Wilder chose to create a work of honesty, depth and self-reflection of the golden age Hollywood studio system. It breaks-down many of the ways the studio system was flawed form its golden idol of the star’s gaze to the systems overlooking of its writers to way Norma was once a star but once she got older with time she was passed up for the younger talents of the system as this can be even true about modern Hollywood as talents change as some older stars are forgotten about over time. In 1989, the National Film Registry included Sunset Boulevard on its list of the first twenty-five movies to be selected for national preservation, which might not mean an awful lot at the moment, but still proves the United States acknowledged the artistic, cultural and historical value of the Wilder-Brackett effort, even if a lot of feathers were inevitably ruffled and a lot of egos trampled in the process of making this intimate exposure of Hollywood’s dirtiest laundry. It was talked about Billy thought of many ways to tell such a story about Hollywood as one of the ways he thought about doing was doing a comedy movie with Mae West and Marlon Brando in which seems like an interesting take upon the whole look upon it all. Without me there wouldn’t be any Paramount Studios,” declares Gloria Swanson as Norma Desmond in Billy Wilder’s black comedy Sunset Boulevard (1950). Former silent film star Desmond may be mad, but there is a grain of truth in what she says: Swanson was one of Paramount’s biggest stars even back when it was called Famous Players-Lasky, just as we are told Desmond was too. While Sunset Boulevard appears to attack the pretentions and excesses of the silent era, in fact its argument about the bad old days of Hollywood is more complicated than that. The horror at the heart of the film is that, as the studio system was starting to crumble, the beginnings of the industry were coming back to haunt it. Desmond’s pride mocks the fall of Hollywood just as it was teetering, rocked by the antitrust laws, the coming of TV and the communist witch-hunt as we seen this change was all coming for the studio systems.

Sunset Boulevard preliminary draft with original opening scenes and Montgomery Clift listed on cast sheet, 1948. A fascinating early script draft for Sunset Boulevard, Billy Wilder’s classic 1950 film noir with Gloria Swanson and William Holden. A simply typed warning from Wilder and screenwriter Charles Brackett graces the cover page: “This is the first act of Sunset Boulevard. Due to the peculiar nature of the project, we ask all our coworkers to regard it as top secret.” And top secret it remained, especially since Wilder had not finished writing the script. These preliminary pages were all he turned in to Paramount. Interestingly, the second, unnumbered, prologue page lists the film’s characters and corresponding “Actors We Hope To Get,” under which is listed Montgomery Clift as the lead, Dan Gillis (the character’s name would go from “Dan” to “Dick” to “Joe”). Clift was originally slated for the role, and was offered a $60,000 paycheck, but withdrew from the production for personal reasons purportedly having to do with the film’s plotline and his affair with the much older singer Libby Holman. The first five pages of the script are most fascinating: there is no handsome screenwriter floating face-down in a pool, rather, this original version opens with Gillis’ corpse arriving in a morgue, surrounded by other corpses. The conversation and eventual narration that followed was received by screening audiences as humorous. Wilder cut it, of course, but a few hundred lucky individuals saw Wilder’s original vision for the now infamous opening scene. An intriguing memo page is mingled in between dialogue pages, changing Gillis’ first name from “Dan” to “Dick” and his quarters from a storage space to the chauffeur’s room, as well as making Norma’s car a Hispano-Suiza, rather than a Rolls, and her writing project the Salome script, rather than her memoirs (though the idea of “Norma Desmond’s Memoirs, a Norma Desmond Production, starring Norma Desmond” is gruesomely fascinating as it showcases some bold change to the movie yet showcases how the movie was always so good even early drafts. riter/director Billy Wilder is making commentary on the sad state of screenwriting in Hollywood during the Golden Age. Gillis is at the mercy of everyone: the actors, the studios, the script readers. As he quips, “the last [film] I wrote was about Okies in the Dust Bowl. You’d never know, because when it reached the screen the whole thing played on a torpedo boat.” Gillis (and by extension, Wilder) is jaded with the lack of control and power that writers have in the business and the soul-sucking balancing act between creative freedom and industrious regimen that the studio system had often killed. It was how Hollywood worked in that golden era.

What’s most fascinating about Sunset Boulevard is just how on-the-nose its commentary is on the industry. Life imitates art in many aspects of the film. Actress Gloria Swanson, who portrays Norma, was also a silent film star in her heyday, and she won the role after several similar actresses turned it down in disgust. When her character says, “Without me there wouldn’t be any Paramount Studios”, it’s almost a fourth-wall break: Swanson herself was instrumental in the rise of Paramount as a major power. Cecil B. DeMille is a crucial character in the story, Norma’s biggest directing collaborator, and he is played by, well, Cecil B. DeMille himself! It’s like another subtle wink at the audience, hinting at the universality of its message by seeping into the very cast and crew of the film. For a film so anti-Hollywood to get the full Hollywood treatment is an accomplishment in itself, and some still speculate that Paramount would not have green-lit the project if they fully understood Billy Wilder’s intentions. He allegedly had the script only halfway written when production began, which wasn’t entirely uncommon back then, but it was a quirk of the system that allowed Wilder to brazenly throw shade at the system as he was taking advantage of it to get his picture made. An ironic case of the screenwriter imposing his will on the industry rather than the other way around. It was work of honestly as it was reflection of the golden age of Hollywood. It simply has so many layers upon this movie. I hope you enjoyed today’s talk about this movie as I will return something else in future as norma says at the end. this is my life all those cameras and action as all those wonderful people in the dark. what is the scene as where am i. its a reflection of the star and the system as this movie is a self-reflection of Hollywood.

peter lorre:WHAT A CHARACTER

peter lorre:WHAT A CHARACTER

So today I talk about peter lorre for What A Character! blogathon hosted by Once Upon a ScreenOutspoken and Freckled, and Paula’s Cinema Club. This post is written in conjunction with the What a Character! blogathon for it to honor the wonderful Character actor peter lorre i talk about him for my tribute today in my artcle today.  If you want to check out posts form this event please do so anytime at  Once Upon a ScreenOutspoken and Freckled, and Paula’s Cinema Club.  So let’s begin to honor this wonderful Character actor today

Movie Review – Casablanca

Few American films have ever been held in such universally high regard as Casablanca.It is among of my favorite movies all time. Few flims are so highly regarded as this classic as its most requoted with referenced, parodied, and paid homage to across film & television. It’s full of witty, memorable lines that always seem to showcase this classic often. ***This is a short analysis of the film. It contains spoilers. Casablanca is not a film noir per se, but it reflects many elements of the genre, mainly its setting, mood, cinematic style, and typical romantic lone hero. Most of the action takes place in the title city of Casablanca. The urban environment of transients is over-crowded and decadent, a hotbed for crime and corruption in which the hopefuls wait for their chance to escape to Lisbon, eyes expectantly drawn to the sky (“Perhaps tomorrow we’ll be on that plane”) and the less fortunate steal, beg, bargain, and otherwise traffic in human misery. The men and women who stop in Casablanca on their way to a better life never want to be there. The war affects everyone: “the leading banker in Amsterdam is the pastry chef; his father is the bellboy,” a loyal employee of Rick’s informs a customer. The police force, represented by Nazi-collaborating, corrupt official Capt. Luis Renault (Claude Rains), knows that “human life is cheap,” and so is honor. Cops round up suspects even when they already know who committed the crime, shoot people and then decide whether to call it suicide or resisting arrest, expect to win at roulette tables in illegal establishments, ask for sexual favors in return for signing documents, and generally “blow with the wind” in providing support. Signor Ferrari (Sydney Greenstreet), as leader of all illegal activities in Casablanca, holds a very high position of influence and is considered “respectable.” In a world in which crime is a daily constant and the corrupt prosper, in which man-made laws are meaningless, the good and just must abide by laws higher than themselves. But how does one single film manage to be just as effective each and every time? How is that every time Rick is left at the train station, I find myself feeling just as betrayed as he is? How is that all these comedic bits I’ve heard countless times still make me laugh hard? How come I am deeply moved every time during that final exchange between Rick and Ilsa? The answer lies in the films craftsmanship, which has led to its timelessness. Everything about Casablanca is made perfectly. The script paces itself perfectly, making sure to never waste your time on something that isn’t important. The dialogue is sharp, always revealing something about the characters, and moving the plot along, sometimes all at the same time. The actors are involved. Rick is the role Bogart was born to play. Ingrid Bergman is beautiful as Ilsa. Claude Rains is a great comedic straight man, often bringing some humor to dramatic scenes, but never interrupting them. Curtiz knows when to let his actors speak as truly marvelous acting form everyone to its leads to the supporting cast of the movie as this movie is a classic as time itself. so its a must see classic you should check out today.

M (1931 film) review

M is a film that requires no introduction. On many lists that attempt to put together the “best films ever made”, M is a film that always seems to feature prominently. Directed by the legendary German filmmaker Fritz Lang, M was his first sound film after having previously made his name in silent cinema with this certainly being quite evident as long stretches of the film go by without any sound at all or with simply no music. This leads to M feeling almost like a silent film with sound (if that makes sense at all), as Lang – along with many of his contemporaries – was still unsure of how to deal with sound in film and thus this led to an often noticeable lack of music in films coming shortly after the advent of sound films. M embodies this and, yet, might be the finest film to come from this era of confusion. A masterful psychological thriller with gorgeous German expressionist cinematography, a brilliant performance from Peter Lorre, and brilliant social critiques, M is a film that thrills, terrifies, and paints a chilling picture of the world around us. As with any film by Lang, the film’s cinematography is gorgeous in how it captures the streets of this quiet German town that has wracked with fear over the constant child murders that has led to much speculation and investigation as to its culprit. Often set during the night, the dark streets of this town are left with nothing more than the street lights as a light source. This is even more true when the action is set indoors as the mysterious Hans Beckert (Peter Lorre) hides from the night watchmen or from the furious gang seeking his apprehension. Constantly lurking in the shadows or being captured in profile, Beckert is a man whose fan we know but is one that is often obscured or hidden away. Instead, it is his victims who stand at his side whose faces we see clearly. As they bound about all happy about getting a balloon or some candy from Beckert, this sadistic killer looks around or turns his back to the camera. This changes by the film’s finale where Lorre is consistently facing the camera as his trial occurs, but before then, his lack of visibility created this mysterious aura about him, especially in the first time we see him as Lang uses just his shadow cast over a wanted poster to introduce the audience to the character. Visually, one of the standout moments comes with an aerial shot of Beckert running the dark streets frantically in an attempt to escape the beggars who have tasked with locating the murderer. Running for his life only to find his every possible escape blocked off by these men, he is forced to run into a building which leads to a thrilling and gripping chase sequence both in and out of the building. The moment is a real highlight in the film with the shot being just the cherry on top to the masterful display of tension and thrills demonstrated by Lang in the moment. However, in discussing the film’s visuals, it is impossible to not mention the reliance upon mirror reflections. Often times, Hans is looking into a window or just a mirror and we see both his profile and his reflection. The significance of this does not come into play until the finale. Captured by the crime underworld who views him as a liability and a threat to their business with the cops raiding clubs run by the gangsters on a nightly basis to find the murderer, Hans is brought to their secret hideaway for trial. Surrounded by the gangsters, the club patrons, and the beggars, Hans is forced to face a literal court of public opinion which is inclined to find him guilty. Pleading his case, Lang uses Hans as a means to discuss the concerns in the world regarding mental health. It may be 1931, but Lang showed a great understanding and compassion for those suffering from mental illness, as is the case with Hans Beckert. He kills young girls, but has no recollection of doing so and is appalled by what he has done, but what he does it out of compulsion. Can one really be made to hang for the chemical imbalance in their brain or should they be turned over for treatment instead? It is a worthy question and it is one that Hans poses to the court of public opinion as he describes the way in which he tries to outrun himself. He lives in the shadow of himself and also feels himself following him around every corner and down every alley. He, in many respects, is a Jekyll/Hyde character who is a normal everyday person until a switch flips – a switch that is always there – and he becomes a sadistic killer who preys on young girls. The mirror shots used by Lang perfectly hint at this as they show his fractured sense of self that has become divided by the Hans Beckert that has already been rehabilitated by doctors and the Hans Beckert that is compelled to kill to satisfy his most depraved urges. He is a despicable figure, but one that is deserving of an unexpected level of sympathy for how even he agrees that his actions are heinous but pleads that he would never do it if he were in control of his own actions. Thematically, the film shows a few concerns that Lang has with society. Seeing the rise of the Nazi Party – one that would see Lorre flew Germany just two years later – he was beginning the rise of the persecution culture that was prevalent in Germany and led to the Holocaust, in which scapegoats were sought for the ills of society and Jews, homosexuals, the mentally ill, and the handicapped, were the unfortunate targets. In this film, Lang shows the dangers of this culture in the search for the child murderer. With the police receiving about 1600 reports about the killer with conflicting witness statements for every single report they have received of the killer’s whereabouts or even just the color of a hat a missing girl was wearing, the police’s job has become incredibly difficult. Random men are attacked in the streets and accused of being the killer. They are brought in the police station or just have their lives threatened by the angry onlookers who are certain they have found the killer as the guy innocently asked a little girl where she lived. It is a terrifying display that gives the film much of its tension as you can feel the paranoia of this town bubbling over to the point where it is not just imperative to capture this killer to protect the children he may kill. It is also imperative to find him to just end this insanity that has led to everybody near a child becoming a suspect. However, the same idea is shown and expanded upon as Hans is captured by the gangsters and beggars. Bringing him to their hideaway to face trial by the angry mob that is the court of public opinion, this is obviously not a fair trial. He is guilty, yes, but they have loose shreds of evidence, the letter “M” on his shirt from a guy who saw him with a little girl, and the fact that he ran as their chief pieces of evidence that are thrown at him and used to condemn him to death at the hands of the mob. These are circumstantial at best until he admits his guilt, but they show the danger that can ensue. The public is not a position to judge guilt without actually hearing proper evidence or having been there, as they simply do not know. They rely upon conjecture and hearsay to form their opinion without actually thinking about the evidence, whether it makes any sense or not, and simply approaching the situation rationally. Instead, it is insanity that rules the day and leads the charge with everybody so angry that they seek to find somebody to accuse. In this case, Hans is guilty but the other men accused were not and yet they had their names dragged through the mud in the name of fear. The same occurs everyday, especially now that all of these sexual assault stories have come out. Many of the men accused are guilty, but it is out of fear of the innocent ones of the bunch that we must wait to hear all of the evidence – even the defense’s evidence – before coming to a conclusion in a court of law and not in the court of public opinion. The public’s aim is simply too off-center and leads to too many people catching a bullet that should have been meant for somebody else, with Lang’s film being extremely concerned about this element in particular. However, he similarly questions why the public believes they can judge these criminals. In this case, the gangsters have killed people themselves in the past, yet they feel as though Hans’ crimes are worse. How can they be so arrogant and unaware of the trauma their own actions have caused in the past? It is not just mob justice, but an example of how “an eye for an eye makes the whole blind” and “let he who is within sin cast the first stone” as shown in Hammurabi’s code and the Bible, respectively. These are people throwing hatred and judgment while they have skeletons in their own closet and are not without their own demons in the past. The court of public opinion is not just dangerous, but also hypocritical in Lang’s eyes as he uses a court of gangsters as a bit of hyperbole to demonstrate quite obviously the ills people possess in their own character and yet still try to judge the actions of others while giving themselves a pass for the same action. Even more, Lang ends the film by demonstrating the pointlessness of these actions. As his verdict his read, a mother sits crying and looks right at the camera, begging for people to not be like the people in this film. Killing Hans will not bring back the girls, nor will they bring any peace or comfort. Vengeance is not the answer, rather compassion and understanding are the gateway to feeling a sense of closure. Acting-wise, M is pitch perfect with a stunning lead role from Peter Lorre. For one of his first bits of film acting, he demonstrates his impeccable talent as he pleads for his life from this court of public opinion. Begging for mercy and for their understanding of the mental issues he suffers from, he gets down on his knees, shouts, and begs. It is a stunningly emotive and emotional performance in this moment in which Lorre really knocks it out of the park in communicating authentic and raw emotion that never feels too much or poured on too thick. Instead, it really resonates and makes every word from the script land with great resonance. Lorre’s strong performance, as always, relies greatly on his very expressive face as, for much of the film, he is silent. As he hides in the attic of this office, we are left with the dark figure of his body with just his eyes and face there to show his panic about possibly being seen. His face in the mirrors or as he looks panickedly over his shoulders to make sure nobody sees him stalking young girls is similarly demonstrative of his incredible physical performance with his closing monologues demonstrating his incredible spoken performance. It is a truly rounded turn from Lorre that shows great understanding of the craft that, for many, would come after years of being in films. However, he demonstrates just how far having learned the craft on the stage that can take an actor. M is a brilliant work and is one that was long overdue for me to finally watch. It is not just an influential work, but rather one that resonates greatly to this very day and has demonstrated great staying power with gorgeous cinematography, tremendous direction, excellent acting, smart themes (that are still relevant), and a thrilling plot that keeps audiences more than engaged. It is a film with practically no flaws whatsoever, which is truly a rarity.

Mad Love review

Surgeon Gogol (Peter Lorre) is madly in love with performer Yvonne Orlac (Frances Drake) not knowing that she is married to concert pianist Stephen (Colin Clive). After a horrific accident the husband is left with useless hands so the wife begs Gogol to save them. The doctor decides to put the hands of a murderer onto the man and soon murders begin to happen. There have been several film versions of Maurice Renard’s novel ‘Les Mains D’Orlac’ but nothing has come close to the power of this 1935 gem from MGM. I must admit that outside of FREAKS I really don’t think the MGM horror films are that great but this here is certainly a cut above the rest. Sure, the studio delivered some good horror films but not too many could match what Universal was doing but this one here certainly came close. They say you shouldn’t judge anyone by their looks but can we really not do that with Lorre? There’s no question that he was a terrific actor and after the success of M he ended up playing the maniac more times than not but he was so great doing it. This here is another terrific performance as he is quite chilling with his obsessive act and there’s no question that he’s quite the menace. Drake is also very good as the love interest and Clive was always great at playing this type of role. The film really benefits from the great performances but director Karl Freund also adds some good atmosphere here. This is a rather dark movie and the cinematography was perfect and there’s no question that it packs a nice little punch. MAD LOVE has been copies countless times over the years but nothing has come close to its power.

The Maltese Falcon (1941) review

John Huston’s 1941 adaptation of Dashiell Hammett’s The Maltese Falcon opens with a text scroll detailing the history of an ancient treasure. This short introduction could not have been more prophetic, because The Maltese Falcon is a true treasure. This is the quintessential film noir, a movie I don’t mind calling perfect, as it tells the story of a slick private investigator who gets tangled up in the convoluted quest to obtain a legendary falcon statue. Whenever I get around to making my all time favorites list, I’ll be surprised if this doesn’t perch near the pinnacle of it. If you are like me, and haven’t before seen this classic, then stop reading now, because the less you know going in, the better, all you need to know is this is the kind of film that film fans live for. The plot is pure masterwork, there is no other way to put it. I’m not going to go into specifics for two reasons, one, in case you haven’t seen it and didn’t heed my warning above and two, because it would take a long time to unravel this one. What I will say is that this is the twistiest, most knotted, convoluted, layered story I think I’ve ever seen, all the more impressive in that it works flawlessly and never for a second lost me. All that aside though, one of the things I adored most about this film was that I was along for the ride, I love trying to predict plot details while experiencing a story, but I could never get ahead of John Huston’s script, each moment was exciting and unpredictable, and like the film’s main character, I never knew what it was going to do next, all the way until the final fade to black. In addition to the wonderful writing, the acting and character work are superb. Lead character Samuel Spade, played by Humphrey Bogart, might be the coolest character in cinema history. He is a fast talking, cynical, cold-hearted, triumph of writing, who navigates the film’s narrative with a level of bemused sadism, while remaining immune to flattery and bullshit alike. He is aided by his no-nonsense secretary, a wonderful character played perfectly by Lee Patrick. Of course, a noir would be nothing without a femme fatale, here played by Mary Astor, who is also great, as she tries and fails to manipulate Spade. A story like this also needs villains, and boy does The Maltese Falcon have villains. First up you have Joel Cairo, played by Peter Lorre, a character with that name, played by such a iconic actor, what more do you need to know. That’s not it however, this was the film debut of Sydney Greenstreet, playing a gent named Kasper Gutman, you can could tell that Greenstreet was a veteran of stage, because despite this being his first film credit, he commands the screen, owning every minute and holding his own toe-to-toe with legends like Bogart and Lorre. Another star of the film is Huston’s camerawork, aided by Cinematographer Arthur Edeson, Huston paints the film in smoke and shadow, creating one of the most beautifully shot works of cinema I have ever seen. I could keep praising every aspect of this film, but I don’t need to, likely you have already seen it, but if you haven’t, give yourself a gift and watch it immediately. Full of iconic characters, great performances, wise-cracking dialogue, flawless visuals, and the most intricate story imaginable, The Maltese Falcon is, in fact, the stuff that dreams are made of.

The wonderful Character actor  peter lorre whom i talk about some of his classic roles he played on the screen. He was a marvelous actor that played many wonderful roles on the screen. I hope you check out other posts form this wonderful blogathon honoring wonderful legends of the screen. I would love to thank the hosts to this wonderful blogathon. I hope you join me in the future for another review on my blog.

Alfred Hitchcock: The Rules of Visual Storytelling

Hitchcock Didn’t Just Understand the Rules of Visual Storytelling. He Practically Invented Them. As he created the idea of telling it visually as today i will talk about this golden rule as i feel like to tell you about this simple rule.

Rule one: The first of Hitchcock’s rules of visual storytelling is to start with a wide establishing shot. That means start out with a wide-angle lens, and communicate a sense of place, before introducing the characters. As lets show you a few examples of great shots that give you an idea of this type of notion. This shot form the movie form the movie of Rebecca” (1940) shows you this type of idea how to build a scene with just a visual cue alone as the way she stands in the shot shows you the masterful idea of that a shot matters to the frame to give you details on what goes on visually in the movie as visually is the simple rule that makes a flim magically work on screen.

The unnamed protagonist (Joan Fontaine) moves into Manderlay, she enters into a foreboding relationship with the estate’s housekeeper, Mrs. Danvers. Played with a supreme sternness by Judith Anderson, Mrs. Danvers is ferociously obsessed with the house’s first lady, the titular Rebecca, and while her spiritual connection to the deceased remains in question, Hitchcock alludes to such unearthliness in a handful of chilling shots, none more effective than the one above. Standing like a phantom in Rebecca’s bedroom (which Danvers refers to as “her favorite room in the house”), Hitchcock captures the housekeeper as a black silhouette against the ghostly transparent curtains, the room bathed in a soft, spiritual light. If there was any indication that Mrs. Danvers should not be trusted, this image is certainly it as shows you by it to give you all you need know on the building of this element as next scene form hitchcocks the birds as you can get an idea of a tense horror about to build up as often parodied but never bettered, this is one of Hitchcock’s most purely cinematic sequences. As the birds begin to attack, Melanie (Tippi Hedren) heads to the school to collect her fiancé’s sister (Veronica Cartwright). Melanie nervously waits outside the school, but doesn’t notice the crows quietly gathering on the playground behind her.  as they are all sitting outside her class-room to show you that this scene is very chilling as it even more chilling with kids singing the background of it. As its a reveal of the horror to come.

The most famous scene that setups as often mocked in so many movies but never as chilling as the orginal scene is the famous shower scene as not only is this the most iconic scene of Hitchcock’s career, but arguably the most impactful single scene in cinema history. While killing off the heroine (Janet Leigh) so early in the movie is shocking enough, the brutal manner of her murder is even more disturbing. We never see the knife actually penetrate Leigh, and we never see any gore as yet this scene feels so personal and scary as part of reason why this scene works so well is because a shower is a personal space for anyone as you are meant feel safe in this place.

Rule Two: Another of Hitchcock’s rules is “Don’t Direct the Actors, Direct the Audience.” In other words, film every scene, every shot, with the audience in mind as you dont direct the scenes you tell your stories trough the visual frist as that simple rule is meant direct you to what you meant to feel at that moment of the scene trough the visual frist but not every flim-maker follows this golden rule but this rule is simple as it comes. here are a few examples of this type of mannerism in flim. Judy’s (Kim Novak) transformation into Madeleine is less boisterous and showy than some of Vertigo‘s more iconic moments, but no less potent. It uses color, lighting, and a melancholic track by Bernard Herrmann to create an atmosphere of majestic, eerie beauty. In it, Scottie (Stewart) asks the brunette Judy to pin up her newly-bleached hair like the late Madeleine Elster. This movie is all about the color green, symbolizing Scottie’s growing obsession with Madeleine as this scene shows you the obression of him over that person.

First off, this scene is so gorgeously shot you could print out and hang up stills of every frame. But it also shows how much Hitchcock was a master at taking his time to sow the seeds of suspicion rather than leaping right into a climactic moment. In North By Northwest, you slowly get the idea that something is awry as soon as Cary Grant’s Thornhill gets off the bus as this scene is a showcase of the power of visual story-telling. As not even word is needed to show you the fear of him a it comes down to him.

Rule Three:The third rule is the best known of the rules of visual storytelling—so much so that it’s often referred to as “Hitchcock’s Rule.The size of an object in the frame should be proportional to its importance to the story at that particular moment. In other words, use the framing of the shot to help communicate important story elements or detaIls to the viewer. this scene of Thorwald returns shows you raw power of it as not even need a word to show his fear.

You could pick countless scenes form this remarkable movie of the birds to showcase the raw power of what horror this movie showcases in the raw amount of horror that unfolds on screen as this marvelous scene shows you how without words horror can unfold on screen as the gas sation goes boom as its such a scary and intense scene of raw power on the screen.

Rear window review bonus feature

Hitchcock isn’t the master of tension without good reason as his direction in rear window of how Rear Window is one of the best instances of how Hitchcock builds tension as he manages to slowly over each scene build tension throughout the film. Rear window is is one of Hitchcock’s finest tales which is an tale of voyeurism in miniature as every open window in the blistering apartment complex that Hitchcock’s camera resides in leads to another character, another emotion, another scene, and another mystery that you are set upon to figure out.

Image result for Rear window

James Stewart’s performance on the screen as Jeff is one of the finest acted on the screen. He emotes with such detailed movements that shows each of his expressions with his eyes and detailed movements that makes his  performance truly special to watch unfold on the screen. James Stewart delivers possibly a career best performance as the stir crazy invalid. Restricted to only minimal body movement as its truly one amazing performance you watch unfold on the screen.

Image result for rear window

Thelma Ritter plays such a fine role upon the screen. Grace Kelly gives out such an amazing performance on the screen.  Beautiful Grace Kelly is outstanding as the lovely girlfriend who turns into an adventurous spy as she gets interested in his boyfriend’s new hobby as she gets into the troubles of the mystery with her boyfriend. She is so charming to watch unfold on the screen.

Image result for Rear Window

You get the impression Hitchcock was a director that liked to be pushed and tested to his limits. From the early days of the cramped Lifeboat to the cleverly edited one-shot Rope, Hitchcock has enjoyed being technically restricted and challenged. Rear Window may have been filmed on the largest indoor soundstage at the time but he forced himself to remain tightly focused on the important elements of the story which was cleverly written by John Michael Hayes.

Image result for Rear Window

Rear window is superbly directed by Hitchcock with great use of suspense, the film presents the director in complete control of his film-making wizardry that is so smartly crafted out with wonderful Cinematography by Robert barks and a wonderful musical score by Franz Waxman that all make this movie truly come to life upon the screen.

Rear Window is a wonderfully simple thriller that also flirts with comedy and drama. With the always active photographer, L.B. ‘Jeff’ Jefferies, confined to a wheelchair he is left with little to do but spy on his fellow neighbours across the courtyard. Jeff becomes a voyeur in the same way we do when we watch movies upon the screen. Rear Window is an undisputed masterpiece that you simply will adore to watch anytime.

The Ruth rating:

I hope you enjoyed my tribute to marvelous hitchcock today as i talked on framing as this bonus review at end was another bit of tribute to him as i felt to give something new today then what i normally talk about in my artcles as today i am giving you fine examples of the master of how hitchcock is the master of flim no matter the era. I simply adore him as happy belated birthday to hitchcock. So good evening folks


So today I am talking about the batman. I grew up being a huge batman fan as reads almost anything connected to the batman often. This movie recently came out on March 4. Between bus adverts, viral campaigns, and truck loads of merchandise, the new movie is causing quite a stir. The only way you will have avoided it is if you have spent the last couple of weeks actively dodging the hype machine. The movie is called The Batman and it is directed by Matt Reeves. The film stars Robert Patterson, Zoë Kravitz, Paul Dano, Colin Farrell, Jeffrey Wright, and Andy Serkis, John Turturro and Barry Keoghan(cameo as joker) The batman sees the Dark Knight cross paths with the Riddler, Catwoman, and Penguin and Carmine Falcone and Gordon as also many other smaller roles such as joker(spoiler alert)he is played by Barry Keoghan as its so short and brief in movie. I will put spoiler tags on spoilers but I want remain as spoiler free but some key things do make movie even more the true batman movie of all time.  The movie kicks off on Halloween thus a nod to one of the greatest batman storylines of all time as also he was a teacher of matt reeves at school. The perpetrator of the murder is long gone, but they have left a riddle at the scene of the crime. This riddle makes it clear that this murder was not an accident, nor the result of a burglary gone wrong, this was a carefully planned and meticulously orchestrated death as he often leaves clues at the scene of his crimes in form of riddles.  As batman looks into the crimes finds self at Iceberg Lounge – a seedy nightspot run by Oswald ‘Ozzy’ Cobblepot, better known to the criminal underworld as the Penguin. The origins of that element started in batman comics in the 1990’s as it has been the base of where he does his crimes for years which is a seedy nightspot run by Oswald ‘Ozzy’ Cobblepot, better known to the criminal underworld as the Penguin it’s not just the Penguin that Batman crosses paths with, as he also meets club worker and part-time cat burglar Selina Kyle. Normally starting movies have origin points and origin stories as this movie assumes you know these icons by now as batman has been around for ages by this point in history. I am simply amazed by its marvelous acting by stars Robert Patterson, Zoë Kravitz, Paul Dano, Colin Farrell, Jeffrey Wright, and Andy Serkis, Serkis, John Turturro and Barry Keoghan(cameo as joker) as all of these roles. We see the batman aka the dark knight aka vengeance cross paths with the Riddler, Catwoman, and Penguin and Carmine Falcone and Gordon.  . The penguin is played by Colin Farrell as he is a more comirelief that may make you laugh a bit but he is simply a mobster that was working for Carmine Falcone(spoiler) as he is simply a funny relief to the darkness of others but he can also be very bad too.

The Riddler is played by paul dino as he is the main lead villain of movie as he simply is marvelous this isn’t your grand-dad’s the riddler as he really comes off as a threat. Robert Patterson plays vengeance aka batman aka the batman as he simply is marvelous as he really isn’t Bruce yet as that side isn’t even out to him yet but he simply is amazing in the movie form start to finish. Catwoman is played by Zoë Kravitz as she is simply amazing in her performance as she gives out a comic-book take on her in many ways as also a big reveal her dad is Carmine Falcone(spoiler) Carmine Falcone is played by  John Turturro as he is played like the character in comics to every point of view as feels like the true version of him as he also plays key role into the Riddler plot in the movie as he is the rat brought into the light.(spoiler). 

Matt reeves direction as has captured the true nature of batman in his early years as this movie showcases many layers that comic book fans of batman will know for ages as he is a huge batman comic book fan and Matt Reeves was a screenwriter student for Jeph Loeb, as he directs this movie with such passion and love for the character you feel it almost come to life as it’s the fans true-version realized to screen to a perfection unlike anything else you ever seen on the screen. 

The production design is like a comic-book as its one of the best ever done in film ever as you feel like a more grounded batman comic page coming to life on the screen. The musical score has been one of weakest things in most recent batman movies but this one is amazing as it captures tone of the batman to a tee as it’s by Michael Giacchino’s as his dark symphony for the batman captures the tone perfectly. As you will know many nods to batman comics form batman court of owls to long Halloween and zero year and many others. The waynes play key part into movie too as but his dad as sins of father’s as mom is never shown but hinted in movie as his dad is shown in brief videos running mayor of gotham on projector (spoiler) as both play roles as he covers up the truth about Bruce’s mom family’s of insanity to and Carmine Falcone’s dad as he did one mistake that cost him forever as he was a good man as even good men have moments of weakness.(spoiler) as it may be why they died.(it’s a twist on the story that changes batman but also a bold idea).

5/5 This is the true batman movie for batman fans since childhood but also works as one of best movies about batman ever that feels like a batman comic come to life on the screen.(yes many spoilers in end point so please see movie soon if you wish avoid so many spoilers). I thank you for joining me today to review this wonderful modern classical modern movie review today.


Flash Gordon which is Mike Hodges-directed as produced by Dino De Laurentis as he produced science fiction spectaculars and other movies as it doesnt play down its pulp roots at all as its really a remake of the serial as cutting down on many of the excess of the orginal serial form the start.

Its story following the paths previously established by “Flash Gordon” comic strips and serials, the 1980 film introduces its audience to the handsome, blonde toolbox, Flash Gordon, who is pressed into action to save the Earth as this movie was orginally to made by lucas before Dino De Laurentis started its production which would you know would direct a huge hit that blew the world apart which took so many cues and homages form flash gordon and other classic movies. Yes you can owe a huge thanks to flash gordon serials to inspiring one of the biggest box office hit series of all time star wars. it all started with flash gordon. flash gordon started the star wars unverse in the mind of George Lucas as he was a boy watching these serials becoming inspired by them which would later shape the future of movies to come for ages as flash gordon 1980 would come out after it debuted on the screen.

Hodges plays up the inherent corniness of the character with dialogue that feels right out of the comic strip and a production that is flashy and spiritedly rendered. Whether some of its low-rent looking elements are born out of artistic statement, limitation of resources, or lack of skill may be in the eye of the beholder, but the production combines roughly hewn effects, costumes, and vistas with some that are strikingly rendered on screen that looks like it came right out of a comic strip. The cast plays the sci-fi silliness at full, scenery-chewing volume. Max Von Sydow, Melody Anderson, Topol, Timothy Dalton, and Brian Blessed play their parts with fully-committed energy. Their lack of winkiness keeps the film from becoming mired in self-aware camp. Sam J. Jones, as Flash, may have the least interesting role as all of the cast give out such remarkable performances for what they were given on the screen. as for moment everyone almost adores is the queen battle scene in which flash gordon rushes to save the day. it simply is a remarkable dream as queen does one of the most rocking soundtracks of the 1980’s.

This not a serious “Flash Gordon,” yet it crackles with energy, unassuming adventure, and comic strip-derived fun. There is a certain earnestness to the affair that keeps the film from becoming a comedy and illustrates a dedication to form, tone, and story. Elevated by a strong supporting cast, the music of Queen, and the celebration of its roots as it truly stands out as a classic cult classic hit for all time.

5/5 classic movie as even its flaws its quite remarkable as my review copy was an arrow 4k blu-ray which is a remarkable edtion that truly makes this classic shine even more on your screens. Its a truly fun classic gem. Flash gordon may have started on the smaller pages of pulp comics then made it to serials then a movie in the 1980’s that started out as luca’s orginal plans for a movie. It truly is a remarkable feat for this icon. So thanks for joining in my review today.

The Killers (1964) review

John Williams is probably the only composer whose music is very known to almost everyone. John Williams career has lasted snice the 1950’s. He is among my favorite  composers of all time list as he always tops it as i can almost name so many of his soundtracks top of my head. So today i join you to review The Killers (1964) which has a wonderful soundtrack by John Williams for The John Williams Blogathon.

The Killers (1964)  or the Killers 64 was a remake of an earlier noir classic movie of the same name. It was orginally set to be a tv show on nbc but as they saw the final product they deicided againist that option to choose to release it on the big screen. The decision proved to be a beneficial one, as the film performed well at the box office and earned Lee Marvin a BAFTA Award for Best Actor. As it changed everything which helped make it feel like its own thing instead being a remake of a classic movie.

The diffrences between 1946 version and 1964 version as the former 1946 version opens at the diner. The former opens with a Hopperesque diner, and culminates with the shooting of boxer Swede Anderson in a seedy motel. Clean and professional, like clockwork. The latter takes place at an institute for the blind, where hitmen Charlie (Lee Marvin) and Lee (Clu Gulager) saunter through the lobby, bullying hapless patients in the place. It shows you form start that the killers 64 has something else on its mind. It savors the anarchy of its lawless characters and invites us to do the same. The overriding mood of the original was doom, but here, it’s psychotically gleeful to the killers.

The rest of the film unfolds with similar irreverence as the 1946 orginal killers movie.  Charlie and Lee are confused by the ease with which Johnny North accepted his fate, and decide to look into his past. They already got paid, so they kill time by looking up Johnny’s best friend Earl (Claude Atkins) and on/off girlfriend Sheila (Angie Dickinson). What makes the hese interrogation scenes so memorable is not the discovery of information, but the brutish way Charlie and Lee go about getting it. These are the men that ended Johnny’s life and here they are dangling Sheila out of a window because she’s refusing to disclose his secrets as it truly stands out on flim.

Coon’s screenplay was quietly radical in terms of how it stitched seemingly incongruent noir tropes together. In the past, hitmen had been dismissed as loners or psychopaths, doomed to die before the final reel. By contrast, private detectives were seen as trustworthy, and given access to exclusive information. Charlie and Lee are given the access of the more congenial private detective, but their homicidal tendencies lead them to abuse their power and belittle their various witnesses. We never know what they’re going to do next, and the result is as sickening as it is exciting as this screenplay really is something boldly new. If there’s one element of The Killers ‘64 that pales in comparison to the original, it’s the casting of Ronald Reagan as the antagonist. Reagan is the gangster who romances Sheila and pushes Johnny into the heist, despite not possessing the moxy to do either as he really does nail the role down greatly. He’s hopelessly outmatched in scenes opposite Cassavetes, and given that he retired from acting soon after the film’s release, one can assume his heart wasn’t invested in his work.Fortunately, the limitations of Reagan’s performance are salvaged by the finale, where Siegel delivers some of the most brutal and stylized directorial work of his career as it is his best work on screen yet still limiting overall compared to others in this remarkable flim. The soundtrack of this movie as done by john willams is quite good as does really work for this remarkable flim.

The Killers ‘64 was one of the first noir remakes to go into production, and it’s a testament to its quality that it remains one of the finest. The decision to use the original premise as a jumping off point for another story was inspired, and the nimble execution by Siegel and Coon qualifies it as some of their best work. The 1946 version may still have the upper hand as its one of finest noir classics all time yet this remake and movie stands the test of time as its quite a gem of a movie. 5/5 A classic movie that stands test of time.

I thank you for joining me today to review this classic movie as i hope to catch you again soon for another review soon.

Queens of Animation by Nathalia Holt

The Untold Story of the Women Who Transformed the World of Disney and Made Cinematic History “From Snow White to Moana, from Pinocchio to Frozen, the animated films of Walt Disney Studios have moved and entertained millions. But few fans know that behind these groundbreaking features was an incredibly influential group of women who fought for respect in an often ruthless male-dominated industry and who have slipped under the radar for decades.In The Queens of Animation, bestselling author Nathalia Holt tells their dramatic stories for the first time, showing how these women infiltrated the boys’ club of Disney’s story and animation departments and used early technologies to create the rich artwork and unforgettable narratives that have become part of the American canon. As the influence of Walt Disney Studios grew—and while battling sexism, domestic abuse, and workplace intimidation—these women also fought to transform the way female characters are depicted to young audiences.With gripping storytelling, and based on extensive interviews and exclusive access to archival and personal documents, The Queens of Animation reveals the vital contributions these women made to Disney’s Golden Age and their continued impact on animated film making, culminating in the record-shattering Frozen, Disney’s first female-directed full-length feature film as this is what the book is about as today i review this wonderful book.

Queens of Animation by Nathalia Holt Review

I grew up loving Disney animation yet I haven’t heard the stories of many things Disney hidden form us until i read books about them as i learned more about them and their past I learned from books like  Walt. Until The Queens of Animation: The Untold Story of the Women Who Transformed the World of Disney and Made Cinematic History. I remembered my love of Mary Blair and thought, Nathalia Holt has something here. I wanted to know the names and the contributions of these unknown women. This book was a wonderful read that enlightened me about these women that never got their due for their work with Disney as you may wonder the names of these animators or creators as you may have heard of Mary Blair whom is considered walt’s greatest artist and designer of artwork for  Walt Disney for his movies and parks. Holt concentrates on the women’s careers but includes enough biographical information to make them real and sympathetic. I was so moved to read about Mary Blair’s abusive marriage. Holt also does a stellar job of explaining the rising technologies that would impact animation, eventually eliminating the jobs of hundreds of artists. We learn about Walt’s interest in each story that inspired the animated movies and the hard work to develop the story, art, and music, along with the conflicts and competition behind the scenes. I learned so many interesting facts! Like how Felix Salten’s novel Bambi: A Life in the Woods was banned in Nazi Germany because it was a metaphor for Anti-Semitism! How Mary Louise Weiser originated the grease pencil, one of the many technologies Disney developed and perfected or quickly adapted as she created that object which was used widely by his artists. I loved the story of Fantasia. Bianca Majolie presented the music selections to Walt, including The Nutcracker Suite’s Dance of the Sugar Plum Fairy and the Waltz of the Flowers. Tchaikovsky’s The Nutcracker ballet had never yet been produced in the United States at the time! The male animators did not want to work on illustrating fairies (they instead created the Pastoral Symphony’s centaurs and over sexualized centaurettes, including an African-American servant who was part mule instead of horse).as they refused work on faries they left that to the women to work on those things. Choreographer George Balanchine was touring the studio with Igor Stravinsky, whose The Rite of Spring was included in Fantasia, and he loved the fairies in the Dance of the Sugar Plum Fairies. Fifteen years later he debuted The Nutcracker at the new Lincoln Center and it became a Christmastime annual tradition.  Holt also shares the story of Mary, a talented artist known for her watercolor style work. She managed to get a job at Disney because her husband worked there, but her talent made her a favorite of Walt’s, which then led to jealousy and resentment from her co-workers, including her husband. At one point, Walt personally invites her to a highly coveted work trip, and her husband practically throws a tantrum because his wife got to go and he didn’t. Mary’s one of the few women in this book where we get a much deeper sense of her life beyond her work at Disney, and Holt paints us a heartbreaking portrait of Mary’s unhappy marriage. I love how Holt highlights how important female friendships were for the women who worked at Disney, and how challenging it was sometimes when broader issues challenged those friendships. One example is the animators’ strike in the mid-20th century, where a pair of animators who were close friends found themselves on opposite sides on the strike. They also happened to be roommates, and so went in to work together every morning, with one of them joining the picket line and the other crossing it. Holt does a good job in showing how even those who didn’t strike were likely aware of the injustices the strikers were fighting against, but they were too scared of losing their jobs to join the picket line. It’s a troubling, at times rage-inducing, history, and I’m just happy that this book finally turns a well-deserved spotlight on these women’s work. Thankfully, the book ends on a happy note, with the story of Frozen, which was the first Disney animated feature film written, directed and led by women. I loved reading about the sister summit that the film’s team organized, where women throughout the company came together to share stories about sisterhood and their loving-and-complicated relationships with their sisters. I remember watching Frozen with my sister, and how much we both related to Elsa and Anna’s relationship. Thanks to this book, I know now that that’s largely because of the women of Disney sharing their own experiences of sisterhood, and more importantly, because of the team of Frozen listening to these experiences, and bringing them to life in Elsa and Anna. There’s likely a long way to go for Disney — and to be fair, lots of other companies — to be truly inclusive for women. Hopefully, books like this help begin to bridge that divide, and raise awareness of how much women have been doing for years, and how much their accomplishments have been minimized in favor of their male colleagues so we can work towards a better tomorrow. As this book is a marvelous book to read from start to finish that will enlighten you upon something you never knew about in the past.

‘Pan’s Labyrinth’: A Richly Imagined, Dreamlike Voyage of Self-Discovery and Character Formation

Guillermo del Toro is one of the most interesting filmmakers and beloved flimmakers in the world today, and he has held that position in our minds and hearts since we saw the little masterpiece called El espinazo del diablo (The Devil’s Backbone) . as I am highly fond of Pan’s Labyrinth. As today i will talk about this classic movie again as i look upon its traits and talk about the marvelous set-work and designs of this wonderful world among other things.

It is okay to begin with a spoiler about the movie as many already know this scene as she dies at start of the movie. What Guillermo del Toro made with  laberinto del fauno (Pan’s Labyrinth) is a dark and twisted fairy-tale that follows the orginal traits of grimm tales fairy-tales. This movie is wonderfully designed with rich sets and wonderful colors and tones that really make this wonderful flim come to life as you are immersed fully into the picture you yourself become lost in the labyrinth in question with her as you feel like you are trying follow her out of it or further into it.  El laberinto del fauno is easily one of the most accomplished and memorable movies of the decade. It was so important to del Toro that the film is made that he lost 40 pounds when making it, dealing with the stress and pressure deriving from lack of time and money as he was really stressed out making this classic movie. The film is one of the ultimate favorite of film critics and millions of inspired audience members around the globe. However you choose to interpret it, the experience of watching it remains equally rewarding. In fact, the very fact numerous interpretations are legitimate only adds to the charm and efficiency of this bizarre materialization of a unique vision and unparalleled style.

Raúl Monge’s storyboards for Guillermo del Toro’s El laberinto del fauno.

Here are several photos taken behind-the-scenes during production of Guillermo del Toro’s El laberinto del fauno. Photographed by Teresa Isasi © Picturehouse. Intended for editorial use only. All material for educational and noncommercial purposes only.

What i showed you above was all form the flim as some looks upon some set pictures and the storyboards with a youtube video talking about this classic movie. As you see this movie really has such amazing depth to it. Guillermo del Toro has combined his love of strange creatures, ghosts and Gothic horror stories with a deep literary sensibility to create genre films uniquely his own. In movies like Pan’s LabyrinthHellboy and Pacific Rim, monsters are not just scary but soulful as they truly stand out as somethng special as i feel his most special to me is Pan’s Labyrinth. Ofelia is a fantastic protagonist. She is a girl you automatically want to protect from the horrors around her and that investment is where this film garners its strength from real and imagined evils of this movie. The heavy symbolism of this movie that notes down many grim classic fairy-tales with shades of Alice in wonderland and the red shoes scene at end. The faun seems to be both good and evil; what are we to make of a huge pile of used shoes, especially worrisome in the time of the Holocaust? The film is visually stunning. The creatures do not look like movie creations but like nightmares (especially the Pale Man, with eyes in the palms of his hands). The baroque organic look of the faun’s lair is unlike any place I have seen in the movies when the giant frog delivers up a crucial key in its stomach as something so moving and timeless about the creature-work of this movie. He invents from scratch, or adapts into his own vision a fairy-tale that is forever timeless. Del Toro says in a commentary that Ofelia is “a girl who needs to disobey anything except her own soul.” The whole movie, he says, is about choices. The powerful acting of everyone is another amazing highlight of this movie with amazing visuals and story-telling it’s something that is forever remembered upon for all time. Guillermo Del Toro released what is arguably his masterpiece in 2006 as he described by the director as the most personal movie I’ve made”, it’s a wondrous merging of history – war-torn Spain, 1944  and fantasy as he weaved an adult fairytale of a young girl’s coming-of-age amid fascism, full of horror and hope, loaded with allusion and allegory that tells a classic tale of that you will marvel upon on the screen.

What’s so magic about Pan’s Labyrinth, despite its obvious surreal elements, is how it combines old-fashioned fairytales, the type we all grew up with and wanted to be a part of since we were little, with the horrifying realities of the world we live in. Of course, the war-based events are hardly magic in the sense of what’s actually happening, but I believe beneath the surface, there’s a certain beauty to this film that’s not very apparent, but quite mesmerizing. I like to think it’s a film about our own personal fantasies and how we try to find comfort and salvation in them, speaking especially to those who feel detached from reality and their everyday experiences. I came to this conclusion after a very specific shot during the film’s climax, which made me question what I had seen prior to that – did it happen, was it even real…? While Pan’s Labyrinth can’t quite be classified as an horror movie, it’s nothing short of terrifying. I would say i Liken the song by Jefferson airship to the crazy ride you have upon the movie as the movie is a very twisted tale that takes you deep into a maze as song talks about Alice in wonder-land which has very much same type of feeling of a girl exploring upon a dark fantasy.

The atmosphere’s always very heavy and tense after all, the film takes place in a war setting. What’s ironic is that it weren’t even the creatures that provoked fear; it was Sergi López’s phenomenal performance as Captain Vidal. This was a character that oozed hatred and despicability, but even if it’s not the best example, I’ll say that he’s to this movie what The Joker was to The Dark Knight it’s just plainly impossible to imagine it being as good without him, or even imagine it at all. It may look like a regular small film, but it’s actually a very special piece of art that combines the ugliness that can be found in the nature of men with the graphic horrors of the fantasy world – an unusual mixture that leads to a beautiful and heartfelt, yet absolutely horrifying in certain ways, story, wonderfully captured and realized by Guillermo Del Toro as this movie truly is amazing as it stands among the best movies of all time. This movie stands out as a classic that stands out as a true classic that lasts the test of time.So i hope you enjoyed my talk aboout this marvelous movie today as catch you soon for another talk soon as i will give insight to flash gordon soon as my copy of movie comes in to me. So catch you soon

Destry Rides Again: Riding High

Whether or not you believe it is the greatest year of all for the Hollywood studio system, the wonder of 1939 is the sheer depth of its bench. On a ten-movie best-picture ballot, the Oscars found no room to nominate such worthy contenders from that year as Raoul Walsh’s live-wire gangster memorial The Roaring Twenties; George Cukor’s all-star The Women; or Howard Hawks’s Only Angels Have Wings described even at the time as “magnificently directed” by the hard-to-please Graham Greene. And on a list of 1939’s top-grossing films, you have to go down, way down, all the way to number nineteen by some tallies, to get to Universal Pictures and its biggest smash of the year, Destry Rides Again as with many form 1939 this movie is among many other classics such as gone with the wind and wizard of oz. I am reviewing Destry Rides Again on what would have been her birthday today as i feel i amy also present a small tribute to her along with a second review of another classic gem she stared in for her birthday today on what would’ve been her 120th birthday i felt this movie would be a good movie to highlight her greatly as a performer. As i will also review some other films she starred in for her 120th birthday.

Destry Rides Again: Riding High review

The tropes of the Western are so engrained and parodied, that it’s a delight to see a 1930s Western using them so self-consciously to explore both their serious and comic potential. The film that inspired Blazing Saddles begins as outrageous parody, with the hyper-violent town of Bottleneck pictured as having punch-ups and gunfights in the street, and horses riding in and out of the Last Chance Saloon. But this near-cartoonish introduction gives way to a film that surprisingly takes its stakes seriously, even as it plays with the genre/ Bottleneck is a deeply corrupt town. Saloon owner Kent (Brian Donlevy) runs any number of rackets, protected by the Mayor (Samuel S. Hinds) and supported by bar singer Frenchy (Marlene Dietrich). When Kent’s goons murder the old sheriff, town drunk Wash (Charles Winninger) is given the badge in the saloon which functions as the town’s public forum and hall – to the uproarious cheers of the locals, who see Wash as an easy sap to continue conducting their business under. However, Wash’s surprising respect for the badge – he immediately vows to sober up, and does so leads to a different outcome. Wash summons Tom Destry Jr (James Stewart), son of a famous lawkeeper, to town, and is immediately disappointed. Destry is a quietly spoken, drawling man who doesn’t even carry a gun, and is first seen helping a lady, Janice (Irene Hervey), out of a coach with her parasol and canary. Destry doesn’t believe in guns, and instead uses his wits to uphold the law. But that law, when it upholds cheats and scoundrels such as Kent, is there to be defended as well, and one of the film’s shocks is when Destry supports Kent in his claim to a ranch that he tricked a poor rancher into signing over to him in the eyes of the law, the claim is good.

Destry Rides Again is touted as a comedy, and it does have plenty of that, but it’s also a unique Western for its time because it couches manliness in the form of Stewart’s down-home charm. The film begins by showing us a rough saloon town. Gun shots, drunks, and angry men ring through the streets of Bottleneck. We enter the saloon, where everyone is happily singing “Little Joe the Wrangler” (which also makes an appearance in the first section of the Coen Brother’s The Ballad of Buster Scruggs). In this saloon we meet Frenchy, Marlene Dietrich’s character, who has accepted her seedy character as the one that will help her survive.

Even Destry’s oddball feminist touches, such as the climax in which sisterhood saves the town from a possible bloodbath, would have echoes in later films such as William A. Wellman’s Westward the Women (1951). And heaven knows Destry’s most famous scene, that all-out catfight between Merkel and Dietrich, has been imitated time and again, from the MGM musical The Harvey Girls (1946) to 1971’s Les pétroleuses, where Claudia Cardinale dukes it out with Brigitte Bardot—who is playing the daughter of a (male) outlaw named, what else, Frenchie. James Stewart plays Destry to perfection. I would say everyone in its cast is simply wonderful in their roles in this charming movie.

I adore this movie’s charm and atmosphere. It takes the time to flesh out everybody in this town while having a sense of humor about everything. From the odd yet quirky Boris Callahan (Mischa Auer) to the heart-broken and homeless Claggett family, there is no shortage of colorful characters here. Yet even this is great slapstick comedy and wordplay that still finds time to have impactful and deep dramatic moments and scenes as this movie is simply a classic that you should watch again and again as simply few movies match this level of charm that you can watch again and again

Happy 120th birthday to Marlene Dietrich.

Glamour. Defined in the dictionary as: an air of compelling charm, romance, and excitement, especially when delusively alluring. For me, and I am assuming for many of you, glamor is what initially attracted me to the world of classic film. I would say my love of flim began as child as i was always attacted to movie magic as i find no art-from as magical as a movie to take you away to a new world. From Technicolor film stock to gauze-covered lenses, movies from yesteryear rejected the aesthetics of reality in favor of a more stylized world where anything was possible and everything was glamorous. And no star represented this world of glamour and illusion more than birthday girl, Marlene Dietrich as few actress are simply this lovely or enchanting to watch upon the screen as some 120 years later we still adore this wonderful screen legend. In 1930’s as she was procalimed the most Glamourus woman of all time by many as few women could be like her upon the screen as she was able break all the rules due to her Glamour. So to to reflect upon 120 years of this wonderful legend upon the screen.

Shanghai Express review

A beautiful temptress re-kindles an old romance while trying to escape her past during a tension-packed train journey Starring Marlene Dietrich, Clive Brook, Anna May Wong, Warner Oland, and Eugene Pallette Based on the story by Harry Hervey. With a Screenplay by Jules Furthman that is directed by Josef von Sternberg that was distributed by Paramount Pictures. Marlene Dietrich is at her wicked best as Shanghai Lily, a courtesan whose reputation brings a hint of scandal to a three-day train ride through war-torn China. On board, she is surrounded by a motley crew of foreigners and lowlifes, including a fellow fallen woman (Anna May Wong), an old flame (Clive Brook), and a rebel leader wanted by the authorities (Warner Oland) as this movie showcases her at her best in her pre-code era. Marlene Dietrich is an amazing actress as this movie showcases her at her best as you see her skills as an actress on screen showcased as this movie also has some amazing looking cinematography that really can steal the show at times. Anna May Wong also can be very amazing in this wonderful movie. In addition to Marlene’s acting, Shanghai Express is the the greatest all of her movies to show off her extreme beauty. I don’t know exactly what it is that von Sternberg did to make her look so lovely in this film, but he solidified her place as one of the most captivatingly stunning women of the 1930’s.Shanghai Express is an emotional film that showcases Josef von Sternberg’s incredible directorial abilities. The film won an Academy Award for Lee Garmes for cinematography, although Marlene Dietrich often commented on von Sternberg’s involvement. Dietrich considered the beauty of the movie to have been due to von Sternberg and his artistic genius. Whoever was responsible certainly is entitled to an immense amount of praise for this wonderful gem of a movie.


The Scarlet Empress is a grand Hollywood production, filled with romance, melodrama, and amazing studio work. The production design is amazing, cluttered in small details but all so beautiful. The costumes too are fantastic and varied. This is a film of big dresses and large, elaborate sets. Telling the story of the young life of Catherine the Great allows The Scarlet Empress to bask in a visual splendour of Russian style. Marlene Dietrich plays the lead character, initially as someone innocent, naïve, and joyful. Later on Catherine grows up to be ruthless and ambitious, and Dietrich gets to abandon her sweetness in the first half to become her usual confident, sultry self. Josef von Sternberg directs the film was a passion, embracing the excess allowed in a story of royalty. There are darker angles to The Scarlet Empress too, such as a montage of torture and war early on that probably wouldn’t have been allowed had the film been made a year later, when the Hays Code was more strictly enforced. There’s a theme of destiny in The Scarlet Empress, as Catherine is set on the path towards greatness. She does not see the peasants of her world, and lives a rather fairy tale life, which the film plays into with its visuals. Even soldiers are just playthings of the powerful here, rather than real people. The film has intertitles providing historical context and exposition, which gives the film a sense of significance even though the story does not adhere to fact at all. Instead we get a fun rendition of Russian history, with a great central performance and tonnes of visual flair that truly stand out among her flims as she truly is at her best performance as this movie is a showcase for her talent and the great skill of Josef von Sternberg as this movie is a treat to watch upon the screen.

The Devil is a Woman (1935) review

The Devil is a Woman is the last of the six Josef von Sternberg-Marlene Dietrich movies made at Paramount. It’s reasonable to refer to them as the von Sternberg-Dietrich movies. She was his collaborator, his muse and his lover. These movies would quite simply have been unthinkable without her and without her von Sternberg would certainly not have made them. It’s also of course, like the other five movies, an expression of von Sternberg’s particular aesthetic principles. He described the previous film, The Scarlet Empress, as “a relentless excursion into style” and that pretty accurately describes all the von Sternberg-Dietrich movies. While Dietrich was a fine actress she was not in these movies to act – she was there simply to be Marlene Dietrich, to be the centrepiece of a visual extragavanza. Fittingly, The Devil is a Woman is a film about sexual obsession, and the price of such obsession. The Devil is a Woman was based on the 1898 novel The Woman and the Puppet by Pierre Louÿs. Louÿs was a product of the fin de siècle Decadence and one of the great French writers of erotic literature. It’s certainly not difficult to see why von Sternberg would have been attracted to his work.Marlene Dietrich stars as a Marlene Dietrich type: a seductive woman who bleeds men dry for her own amusement while modeling outrageous outfits and enjoying the lawless free-for-all of Spanish Carnival. An older, disgraced military officer warns his young friend about the dangerous seductive powers of all women, then of Dietrich’s soul-draining (and money-draining) villainy in particular. It’s a cinematic trope that dates at least as far back as Theda Bara’s iconic role as The Vamp as this movie showcases her doing that kind of thing that many others did in that day. It may not be the best of their movies the duo did but it simply a fun movie that you will enjoy to watch her give out a marvelous performance upon the screen. It is simply a classic movie you will enjoy to watch often upon the screen.

I choose flims to highlight at her peak as she was simply at her peak with Josef von Sternberg-Marlene Dietrich movies as she starred in many wonderful roles after this peak that are simply classics such as touch of evil among others she starred upon screen. 120 years later we still adore her work as simply to honor her on her 120 birthday. So until next time i will leave you with more movie magic to touch upon in the future.

The devil rides out review

The devil rides out review((


The Devil Rides Out, known as The Devil’s Bride in the United States, is a 1968 British horror film, based on the 1934 novel of the same name by Dennis Wheatley. It was written by Richard Matheson and directed by Terence Fisher. The film stars Christopher Lee, Charles Gray, Niké Arrighi and Leon Greene. The Devil Rides Out is possibly is one of my truly favorite horror movies all time. Today i review the movie for The Third Hammer-Amicus Blogathon.

Welcome to the 3rd Hammer and Amicus Blogathon!!!

The Devil Rides Out is one of those classics in the horror cannon where everything just works in spite of how incredibly silly and hammy it could all be for its subject matter. The Legendary Hammer Horror directors Terrence Fisher’s adaption of Dennis Wheatley’s devil rides out novel of the same name. The script was written by equally legendary writer/screenwriter Richard Matheson and is a much more subdued and serious horror film compared to Fisher’s other works for the studio. It’s much of a psychological horror then a full out horror movie. The movie is a classical psychological horror classic that really stands out with its acting and direction and acting and talents all at the top of hammer horror.

The devil rides is a splendid example of Hammer Films operating at the height of their powers, The Devil Rides Out released as The Devil’s Bride in the U.S. to avoid being confused for a western is pure classic horror as its come.  Christopher Lee, in a role he has long claimed as a personal favorite. The Devil Rides Out wasn’t a big hit at the box office and isn’t nearly as well known as it should be, but it regularly appears near the top of most fan polls of Hammer’s best movies all time.

It was Christopher Lee, himself an avid collector of works on the occult and a fan and friend of Wheatley’s, who spurred Hammer on to make a film based on his works as he truly plays out of one of the finest roles he played upon the screen. The Devil Rides Out also stands apart in its supporting cast, eschewing the regular Hammer stock company as that cast is simply marvelous to watch upon the screen play out their respective roles with such amazing charm and acting skills in their roles they play on the screen. I would this is a fun thriller to watch form start to finish.

The Devil Rides Out is perhaps unlikely to be particularly scary for anyone that loves horror movies as but its such a wonderfully crafted out thriller that is as well as a fascinating oddity in Hammer’s horror catalog as it stands out among them as so diffrent form so many of its counterparts done by hammer horror with wonderful acting that makes its such a wonderful thriller you will adore to watch again and again.

The Ruth rating: