Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

1939 Cinema - Why That Year?

Often cited as a the alpha and omega of cinema at its best.

Why 1939?

Gone With the Wind

The Wizard of Oz.

Snow White

Rebecca

Stagecoach

The Hunchback of Notre Dame

Ninotchka

Wuthering Heights

Why was this year when the lights were going out in Europe so productive of so much quality?

Discuss.

by Anonymousreply 183December 2, 2022 5:33 PM

Rebecca is 1940.

by Anonymousreply 1November 23, 2022 10:05 PM

Snow White is 1937

by Anonymousreply 2November 23, 2022 10:08 PM

Best Picture Noms for 1939:

Dark Victory

Gone with the Wind (Best Picture winner)

Goodbye, Mr. Chips

Love Affair

Mr. Smith Goes to Washington

Ninotchka

Of Mice and Men

Stagecoach

The Wizard of Oz

Wuthering Heights

by Anonymousreply 3November 23, 2022 10:11 PM

All them Goldiggers movies of the 1930s really made studio heads think that bigger was better

by Anonymousreply 4November 23, 2022 10:14 PM

A world facing war - again - needed diversion. The studios delivered.

by Anonymousreply 5November 23, 2022 10:16 PM

Who knows? I was just a little girl at the time!

by Anonymousreply 6November 23, 2022 10:20 PM

Sorry about, R6. Wrong thread!

by Anonymousreply 7November 23, 2022 10:20 PM

Well it seems a few popular novels were given great movie adaptations for one thing

by Anonymousreply 8November 23, 2022 10:30 PM

[quote] alpha and omega …Why ?…Why …?

I suggest you read some Oswald Spengler.

by Anonymousreply 9November 23, 2022 11:43 PM

Also 1939 … Only Angels Have Wings.

Wonderful movie.

by Anonymousreply 10November 23, 2022 11:49 PM

[quote] Why was this year when the lights were going out in Europe so productive of so much quality?

All the Jews had arrived from Paris, Hungary, London, Lisbon. That's why!

by Anonymousreply 11November 24, 2022 12:39 AM

Actually a lot of people might not know that GWTW didn't get seen by most of the public until January 1940, and after. But it was released minimally in December 1939 to qualify for the Oscars, I guess.

by Anonymousreply 12November 24, 2022 1:08 AM

You forgot The Women

by Anonymousreply 13November 24, 2022 1:11 AM

You forgot THE WOMEN, OP!

by Anonymousreply 14November 24, 2022 1:11 AM

Damn, a second too late, r13!!

by Anonymousreply 15November 24, 2022 1:13 AM

The studio system was at its zenith and most of the major studios had very good heads of production…as well as excellence in all the other departments including so many writers as mentioned in R11

The depression era had more or less ended / early sound era had evolved and there was intense competition for quality stories and source material. That year, the movie industry had the perfect balance of creatives and number counters: a ton of output, but quality output.

by Anonymousreply 16November 24, 2022 1:13 AM

Think of 1939 as a dozen years after sound came in and film became an art.

by Anonymousreply 17November 24, 2022 1:18 AM

The winner of the Best Actor award was an Englishman in an English film.

The winner of the Best Actress award was an Englishwoman in an American film.

by Anonymousreply 18November 24, 2022 1:28 AM

A number of reasons OP - the technical demands of sound had been mastered and interpreted into production, so the bold camera work of the late silent era was again possible. Color was also available - 3 strip technicolor worked well (but was exorbitantly expensive). The studios were still vertically integrated monopolies - controlling production, distribution and exhibition - so they were flush. Moviegoing was what people did for recreation - in 39 the average American went to the movies 3 times a week. There had been a huge influx of talent, Jewish and otherwise, from the German and other European film industries and the studios had the cash, demand and capacity to put them to work. It was a technical, financial, cultural and creative peak - the Dream Factory was firing on all cylinders and cooking with gas.

The cultural changes that would erode that hegemony - the War, the loss of the theatre chains to the Consent Decree, the rise of a more affluent, suburban, conservative Middle Class with other leisure options thanks to the car and television - were all still in the future.

by Anonymousreply 19November 24, 2022 1:29 AM

^^ integrated into production. Fuck spellcheck.

by Anonymousreply 20November 24, 2022 1:31 AM

Apologies re "The Women"

And for a couple of wrong years, I was going strictly by memory . . .

OP

by Anonymousreply 21November 24, 2022 2:00 AM

I'd put 1971 up against that year:

The Last Picture Show

A Clockwork Orange

The French Connection

Fiddler on the Roof

Sunday Bloody Sunday

Klute

Dirty Harry & Maude

Straw Dogs

Carnal Knowledge

Willie Wonka & the Chocolate Factory

by Anonymousreply 22November 24, 2022 2:05 AM

I loved it when Ruth Gordon pointed her massive Glock and asked “do ya FEEL luckypunk?”

by Anonymousreply 23November 24, 2022 2:11 AM

Also "Midnight" with Claudette Colbert and Don Ameche. An absolutely sparkling comedy.

by Anonymousreply 24November 24, 2022 2:14 AM

I love your analysis, R19, (and your use of the word 'hegemony') but I'm not sure if I can agree with it.

Wasn't it all just a big coincidence?

by Anonymousreply 25November 24, 2022 2:22 AM

But a new Golden Age is dawning. Just you wait!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 26November 24, 2022 2:24 AM

[quote] The Hunchback of Notre Dame

A towering performance from the Englishman Cedric Hardwicke.

A shockingly disarming performance from the Englishman Laughton.

A wily, clever music score by an American borrowing heavily from Antonin Dvorak.

Some stunning hat-and-scarfs. And some added sex-appeal from the Aussie with the the misspelled surname.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 27November 24, 2022 2:29 AM

Wasn't Rebecca 1940?

by Anonymousreply 28November 24, 2022 2:32 AM

Don’t forget The Great Gatsby

by Anonymousreply 29November 24, 2022 2:33 AM

Gee, I wouldn't know, R28.

by Anonymousreply 30November 24, 2022 2:37 AM

There was also a trend as the 30s wore on for more down to earth characters and their stories. The glamour and exoticism was still there but more tamed and more accessible. I think that homespun aesthetic brought wider audiences to theaters to have experiences they could relate to a little better.

For example, Marlene Dietrich, instead of playing a mysterious and unreachable femme fatale, had a huge comeback as a saloon singer in the classic Western Destry Rides Again, a movie which can certainly be added to the list of 1939 hits. And, similarly, Garbo was making fun of herself in Ninotchka as a working class Russian apparatchik rather than playing a remote and exotic vamp.

by Anonymousreply 31November 24, 2022 3:09 AM

Also:

Gunga Din

Pygmalion

Beau Geste

by Anonymousreply 32November 24, 2022 3:29 AM

Babes in Arms!

by Anonymousreply 33November 24, 2022 3:37 AM

R32 Love Gung Din.

by Anonymousreply 34November 24, 2022 3:42 AM

Oops, Gunga Din.

by Anonymousreply 35November 24, 2022 3:43 AM

Pygmalion was '38.

by Anonymousreply 36November 24, 2022 4:11 AM

[quote]There was also a trend as the 30s wore on for more down to earth characters and their stories. The glamour and exoticism....

What was it culturally about the 1920s, that brought on an emphasis on glamour and exoticism?

by Anonymousreply 37November 24, 2022 4:31 AM

R37 - short answer WWI and the discovery of King Tut’s tomb.

Longer answer - it was the first truly “modern” decade and there was a definite cultural rejection of the old Edwardian/Victorian order. To the younger rebellious generation, that world had destroyed itself and it’s moral credibility in WWI — so out went matronly propriety and modesty as they embraced jazz, urbanity and a the self-consciously smart-aleck mass-media voice of publications like Time & The New Yorker. Women smoked in public and wore short skirts and shorter hair. 100 years on it may look quaint, but it was probably all in all a more radical decade than the 1960s.

by Anonymousreply 38November 24, 2022 4:57 AM

The Rules of the Game

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 39November 24, 2022 5:08 AM

[quote]The winner of the Best Actor award was an Englishman in an English film.

MGM produced Goodbye, Mr. Chips at its Denham, England, studios. It was dedicated to (deceased former head of production) Irving Thalberg. It was directed by (American) Sam Wood. It was an English film, technically, but given the "A" Hollywood treatment by the studio, as it had the previous year's A Yank At Oxford, starring Robert Taylor, with Maureen O'Sullivan and Vivien Leigh, and The Citadel, also starring Robert Donat, co-starring American Rosalind Russell.

Greer Garson made her theatrical motion picture debut in the film, at age 35, having been discovered on the London stage by Louis B. Mayer (who discovered Hedy Lamarr on the same trip). Garson's part was originally to have been played by Myrna Loy.

by Anonymousreply 40November 24, 2022 6:33 AM

R19 Very good explanatory post, thank you!

by Anonymousreply 41November 24, 2022 2:49 PM

R22 Half the titles on your list don't belong there. The 1939 list contains films that became iconic as well as simply famous and critically acclaimed.

You can't seriously equate Willie Wonka with GWTW, The Wizard of Oz, their cinematic innovations, the musical scores that entered into the global memory, and their stars. I mean, really? Judy Garland? Vivien Leigh? Clark Gable? Charles Laughton? Maureen O'Hara?

Come on. Those may be films you like, and some of them (like "Klute") deserve the critical praise they got, but they don't belong on a list with those from 1939.

Who the hell talks about or refers to Carnal Knowledge today?!

As for Fiddler on the Roof - it wasn't a groundbreaking musical. The real groundbreakers were from the 1930s, first, and then in the late 1940s when OKLAHOMA burst onto the stage, and then in the 1950s into a film using stunning photography (Cinemascope, I think) - then came the other R&H works and then in the late 1950s, finally, West Side Story broke another few moulds.

Fiddler on the Roof was nice, but it hardly fell into the category of the stuff that preceded it.

by Anonymousreply 42November 24, 2022 2:58 PM

Nothing's changed really, but Hollywood and especially LBJ, Irving Thalberg and David O Selznick were all obsessed with everything British throughout the 1930s. Snob appeal! It was their idea of class.

British values and history and its long list of literature (much of it already in the public domain), was ripe for Hollywood adaptations and MGM was usually first in line for taking advantage of all of it. Talented British actors, headed by Basil Rathbone and Charles Laughton, established a popular social circle in Hollywood and were welcome at all of the studios.

by Anonymousreply 43November 24, 2022 3:00 PM

Ooops, LB Mayer, not LBJ, lol.

Oh dear, indeed.

by Anonymousreply 44November 24, 2022 3:01 PM

Those films were all crap. They were just an excuse to get audiences into theaters to see the real masterwork, “THE PHANTOM CREEPS.”

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 45November 24, 2022 3:05 PM

"On Borrowed Time" with Lionel Barrymore is an underrated gem from that year as well

by Anonymousreply 46November 24, 2022 4:57 PM

I've always noticed such a difference in the look of movies from the 1930's as opposed to those of the1940's and wondered why. It like it literally happened overnight when 1940 began. A lot of 30's movies you can watch and not easily pinpoint the exact year, but a 1940 movie visually looks so much different from a 1939 one, rather than the gradual yearly evolution prior. I know of course WWII impacted things but its not just the quality or subject matter, the whole look and feel of he movies are suddenly different. Anyone know why?

by Anonymousreply 47November 24, 2022 5:02 PM

Drunk projectionists, Rose!

by Anonymousreply 48November 24, 2022 7:09 PM

Ah, I was still Queen Of The Lot

by Anonymousreply 49November 24, 2022 7:29 PM

The early 70s were the peak of the New Hollywood--the studio system was in its death throes, and you had a lot of young, brash filmmakers (Scorsese, Coppola, Kubrick, etc.) who were rewriting the rulebook and had enough clout to get really interesting films made. Most TV was total schlock and many young, upwardly mobile Americans eschewed it. Audiences wanted to see the corruption and angst around them reflected onscreen. The early 70s, like the late 30s, were the perfect melding of production and audience demand.

I'd put The Godfather up against Gone With the Wind any day.

by Anonymousreply 50November 24, 2022 8:20 PM

New Hollywood had a decent run, approximately 1967-1979, but the blockbusters that came in starting in the late 70s killed it in the 80s.

by Anonymousreply 51November 24, 2022 8:26 PM

The OP's list has only four great movies and another two with great performances.

Not that impressive.

Of course, moviegoers with a little more money, a change from Depression themes, and the studios at full power, staffing and control had been growing the product for several years already. And then everything changed with the war. Things already were coming to that particular disaster as some of these "alpha and omega" effects of the OP's 1939 (Mary!) were in production ("Rebecca didn't open until March of 1940) or at the Podunk Ritz playing.

by Anonymousreply 52November 24, 2022 8:27 PM

[post redacted because independent.co.uk thinks that links to their ridiculous rag are a bad thing. Somebody might want to tell them how the internet works. Or not. We don't really care. They do suck though. Our advice is that you should not click on the link and whatever you do, don't read their truly terrible articles.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 53November 24, 2022 9:32 PM

R47 Probably an improvement in film stock. There tend to be sharper images, more shades of gray, darker shadows in 1940s films. There were also technical innovations such as deep-focus photography (which had been used occasionally since the 20s, but became a style in the 40s, especially as used by Gregg Toland). Also in the 30s, there was the popularity of back lighting, and shimmering images, which can be seen in Cleopatra, It Happened One Night, Mr. Deeds, and a lot of other 30's films - a romantic or glamorous look associated with Victor Milner. This started to go out of style in the 40s, when a sharper, more realistic look was favored.

by Anonymousreply 54November 24, 2022 10:25 PM

R12 did you attend the premiere?

by Anonymousreply 55November 24, 2022 10:28 PM

R55 No, but my grandad saw you there.

[quote]The OP's list has only four great movies and another two with great performances. Not that impressive.

Top grossing films of 1939:

1. Gone with the Wind Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer/Selznick International Pictures $18,000,000[2] 2 Mr. Smith Goes to Washington Columbia Pictures $3,500,000 3 Jesse James 20th Century Fox $2,335,000 4 Babes in Arms Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer $2,311,000 5 The Wizard of Oz Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer $2,048,000 6 Gunga Din RKO Radio Pictures $1,888,000 7 Goodbye, Mr. Chips Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer $1,777,000 8 Dodge City Warner Bros. Pictures $1,668,000 9 The Rains Came 20th Century Fox $1,656,000 10 The Women Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer $1,610,000

Other notable films were:

Stagecoach, Wuthering Heights, The Hound Of The Baskervilles, The Story of Alexander Graham Bell, Love Affair, Confessions of a Nazi Spy, Young Mr. Lincoln, Juarez, Only Angels Have Wings, Midnight, Five Came Back, Beau Geste, Bachelor Mother, The Four Feathers, Son Of Frankenstein, Golden Boy, The Old Maid, Dark Victory, The Rains Came, Intermezzo, Babes In Arms, The Roaring Twenties, Ninotchka, Drums Along The Mohawk, Destry Rides Again, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, The Adventures OF Sherlock Holmes, Each Dawn I Die, First Love, The Flying Deuces, At The Circus, Idiot's Delight, In Name Only, Of Mice And Men, The Little PrIncess, Stanley And Livingstone, The Story Of Vernon And Irene Castle, Union Pacific, The Tower OF London, and You Can't Cheat An Honest Man.

by Anonymousreply 56November 24, 2022 10:53 PM

* 1. Gone with the Wind -- Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer/Selznick International Pictures $18,000,000

2 Mr. Smith Goes to Washington -- Columbia Pictures $3,500,000

3 Jesse James -- 20th Century Fox $2,335,000

4 Babes in Arms -- Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer $2,311,000

5 The Wizard of Oz -- Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer $2,048,000

6 Gunga Din -- RKO Radio Pictures $1,888,000

7 Goodbye, Mr. Chips -- Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer $1,777,000

8 Dodge City -- Warner Bros. Pictures $1,668,000

9 The Rains Came -- 20th Century Fox $1,656,000

10 The Women -- Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer $1,610,000

by Anonymousreply 57November 24, 2022 10:56 PM

R12 what is your diagnosis?

by Anonymousreply 58November 24, 2022 11:15 PM

Both Billy Wilder and Hitchcock arrived at that time.

by Anonymousreply 59November 24, 2022 11:48 PM

Dark Victory.

by Anonymousreply 60November 24, 2022 11:59 PM

^ Why?

by Anonymousreply 61November 25, 2022 12:02 AM

r47, basically it was the ladies' hairstyles that changed.

by Anonymousreply 62November 25, 2022 2:45 AM

[quote] it was the first truly “modern” decade and there was a definite cultural rejection of the old Edwardian / Victorian order.

R38 You're talking about the 1920s rather than 1939.

There is NO simplistic answer to the OP's question. It was all just a coincidence.

by Anonymousreply 63November 25, 2022 2:50 AM

Who can forget...Fifth Avenue Girl?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 64November 25, 2022 2:58 AM

Lupe's *The Girl From Mexico*

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 65November 25, 2022 3:31 AM

R63 - I was responding to R37s specific question about the 1920s at R38.

There certainly isn’t a simplistic answer to OPs question - money, technology, available talent, studio structure, cultural values, hierarchies & desires as well as consumer patterns all played a part — but nothing is more simplistically reductive than saying it was “a coincidence”

by Anonymousreply 66November 25, 2022 3:35 AM

OP Excellent idea for a thread. Something I really am thankful for is Datalounge and some of you interesting and creative gents.

by Anonymousreply 67November 25, 2022 3:36 AM

OP don’t forget ThecWomen!

by Anonymousreply 68November 25, 2022 3:38 AM

I wonder how people felt about 1939 in movies at the time, if they realized how lucky they were or just took it for granted and thought films would continue being as good as they were then. These days the best entertainment is coming from the many series that are being made, many have been providing the kind of escapism I imagine these films provided for audiences in 1939. But series don’t have the longevity, convenience or rewatchability of a two hour or so movie; getting through 10 episodes of Brideshead Revisited while rewarding is not something most people would do more than once a lifetime.

by Anonymousreply 69November 25, 2022 3:38 AM

R 21 1971 was also a remarkable year in American film. So much happening in the world and US society too.

by Anonymousreply 70November 25, 2022 3:39 AM

The Women! (I was excited!)

by Anonymousreply 71November 25, 2022 3:39 AM

A Girl Must Live

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 72November 25, 2022 3:43 AM

I think I've probably seen far more '30s and '40s movies than anyone who lived through the era saw! I've seen thousands. I asked my dad about his movie going and he said even at 10 cents it was often more than his family could afford (he had six brothers and sisters). And then they moved out in the country and never saw any movies during the '40s.

But even someone with money to burn living in the big city couldn't have seen as many as I've seen thanks to TCM and all the collectors I've bought from over the years.

by Anonymousreply 73November 25, 2022 3:47 AM

R73 You should lead a film appreciation group or podcast. I'm also interested in old movies and love learning more about the productions, the actors and actresses and writers.

by Anonymousreply 74November 25, 2022 3:55 AM

Also back then, if you missed one of those classics while they were at the cinema how did people catch up? It’s sad to think that a person would just miss out possibly forever- they didn’t know that videos and movies being shown on tv… would become a thing years later…

by Anonymousreply 75November 25, 2022 3:59 AM

I can't remember what they were called, but there were some theaters that showed old movies 24/7 for a cheap price. They had a specific name, but darn it, I can't remember it.

by Anonymousreply 76November 25, 2022 4:08 AM

Revival houses, r76.

by Anonymousreply 77November 25, 2022 4:20 AM

I am watching Rebecca right now.

"I HATED HER!"

by Anonymousreply 78November 25, 2022 4:26 AM

`1959

Anatomy of a Murder,

Some Like It Hot

North by Northwest

The Nun's Story

Room at the Top

The 400 Blows

Imitation of Life

Ben-Hur

The Diary of Anne Frank

Pillow Talk

by Anonymousreply 79November 25, 2022 4:28 AM

Who else was surprised yet thrilled to see THE WOMEN as the 10th highest grossing film of 1939? Especially in a year with so many blockbusters.

I knew it was a hit but I'm frankly shocked to see it was that popular with general audiences of the times.

by Anonymousreply 80November 25, 2022 4:32 AM

Well my goodness, r79, 1959 has to win with Imitation of Life alone!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 81November 25, 2022 4:35 AM

to say nothing of . . .

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 82November 25, 2022 4:37 AM

R79 so much variety in those years too. Some Like It Hot and Pillow Talk although both comedies are quite different. And then you’ve got a wonderful melodrama like Imitation of Life and a religious epic like Ben Hur. Spy thriller like North by Northwest…

by Anonymousreply 83November 25, 2022 4:39 AM

and Anatomy of a Murder which I saw for the second time recently. It's Preminger's best film and the best courtroom drama ever. A classic still relevant today.

by Anonymousreply 84November 25, 2022 4:46 AM

1968

Planet of the Apes

Faces

Rosemary's Baby

The Night of the Living Dead

2001: A Space Odyssey

Rachel, Rachel

Pretty Poison

Oliver

Petulia

The Producers

Funny Girl

Bullitt

Yellow Submarine

by Anonymousreply 85November 25, 2022 4:53 AM

One can't *not* mention...Hello Janine

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 86November 25, 2022 4:56 AM

OP you forgot . .

Love Affair. It's been remade twice. Once by the same director starring Deborah Kerr and Cary Grant and disastrously with Warren and Annette

Mr. Smith Goes to Washington and Gunga Din

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 87November 25, 2022 5:18 AM

[quote]New Hollywood had a decent run, approximately 1967-1979, but the blockbusters that came in starting in the late 70s killed it in the 80s.

That and the early peaking of several of its star auteurs. Bogdanovich became an important film historian, but his work as a writer/director fell off in quality. So did Coppola's once the '70s were over. Altman worked consistently through the '80s, but on a smaller scale than before, with several filmed plays. Malick went off the grid entirely for 20 years. Cimino followed up The Deer Hunter with one of the biggest bombs in movie history, and none of his later films restored his reputation.

by Anonymousreply 88November 25, 2022 6:39 AM

I would add Friedkin, Penn, Rafelson, Lucas, Ritchie, Hopper, and Peckinpah to that list.

by Anonymousreply 89November 25, 2022 6:52 AM

[quote]I can't remember what they were called, 7but there were some theaters that showed old movies 24/7 for a cheap price. They had a specific name, but darn it, I can't remember it.

My dad said there was one in his hometown and they referred to them as "proven pictures". I think it was a regular theater, though, not playing movies 24/7. He saw some silent movies there when he was a kid in the 30s, like the original Ben-Hur. And my mom said her mom made her see The Sheik, because her mom loved Rudolph Valentino - though my mom didn't, as it turned out.

My mother said my grandmother went three times a week, with one of her friends. Not necessarily to the same theater. Going 2 or 3 times a week was very common, then. The movie changed every 3 days , unless it got held over. And there was no TV, obviously.

Also most of the films played the cities first - at one theater. If you didn't want to wait for it to come to your home town, you had to go into the city to see it. Then the film trickled down, to the suburbs, and the outposts. This was true even when I was a kid, and sometimes by the time prints got out to the country they were a bit scratched up, or occasionally, patched together at certain points where they had broken. Going to the city to see a movie on a huge screen in an elegant theater was a big deal to a kid then.

by Anonymousreply 90November 25, 2022 12:50 PM

I don't know if anybody remembers this but there was a hush when you went into some of these movie palaces, you felt like you were treated great, everyone was respectful, and there was opulence all around. Not only that, but there was often a stage show. At Radio City Music Hall (visiting NYC) I still remember the thickness of the carpets. (This was in the early 70s.) It was somewhat cathedral-like in these big theaters. No movie theater is like this at all any more, that I know of. Even local theaters or the multiplexes slowly changed over time to these noisy places where now they have video games and pinball machines, popcorn all over the floor, and crowds of kids running around.

by Anonymousreply 91November 25, 2022 12:57 PM

R9 "John Calvert notes that Spengler's critique of the West is popular with Islamists."

by Anonymousreply 92November 25, 2022 1:04 PM

OP here. If I remember correctly, Spengler predicted the decline of Europe and blamed, amongst others, Beethoven.

In Jim Jarmusch's film "Only Lovers Left Alive" (a film which I loved, by the way, although I know many others didn't), there's a scene in which Adsn the Vampire takes his vampire wife on a tour of Detroit at night. He shows her a run down car park that he tells her was once one of the grandest movie theatres in the world. Mirrored walls reflecting chandeliers, everything gilded . . . And bemoans the paucity of modern culture (having persojally seen centuries of change).

The thing about the 1939 films on that list, and many of the others through the 1930s and 1940s, is that they were films with quality scripts, talented directors, and a wealth of social issues percolating.

Fantasy and gritty reality seemed to be devoured with equal gusto. The Astaire-Rogers films had absurd scripts but there was nothing absurd about the music or the dancing.

You could end up in a double feature with an Astaire film like and Dead End.

Other decades of course produced good films. The original The Godfather, alone, gives the 1970s a place in cinema history

The fifties weren't short great films, either. . . On the Wterfront, The Nun's Story . . . And then the noir oeuvre of the 1940s and 1950s. Films like Days of Wine and Roses, The Apartment, A Place in the Sun . . . These are all great films.

I939 is pulled up because it seemed as if the list of the top ten films were, although hugely varied, films all shared a remarkable depth of talent in writing, directing, production, and acting that produced an inordinate number of not just successful and "good" films, but groundbreaking and iconoc ones.

Perhaps it was the Depression and the uneasy subliminal awareness of the approach of another war that stirred things up. Some of those directors and writers and composers fled Eurooe for reasons that must have informed their work, but hadn't yet trickled into the American scene yet.

In the UK there was an equally fantastic blossoming off fine films based on British literature, some fone by Hollywood studios and directors. Withering Heights and How Green Was My Valley come to mind.

In many ways, the 1930s were dreadful years, in both America and Britain. But in other ways, it was a fantastic era

I don't think this was the case in the.1950s or 1970s, at least not in America. In Britain, rationing went on until 1956, and we began to make other very fine but gritty films like Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner, Saturday Night and Sunday Morning . . .

by Anonymousreply 93November 25, 2022 1:43 PM

^*Adam the Vampire

by Anonymousreply 94November 25, 2022 1:45 PM

Vivien Leigh's BA win was one of my top 5 wins ever

by Anonymousreply 95November 25, 2022 10:07 PM

How very proprietorial of you, R95!

by Anonymousreply 96November 25, 2022 10:54 PM

[quote] Spengler's critique of the West is popular with Islamists.

Yes. They have been trying to invade the West for a millennium.

The fact is that Spengler was very, very depressed in 1939 and so he escaped to 'the New World'

by Anonymousreply 97November 25, 2022 10:58 PM

*Nancy Drew and the Hidden Staircase*

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 98November 25, 2022 11:29 PM

R98 That is the masterpiece that tipped the scales for 1939.

by Anonymousreply 99November 26, 2022 12:57 AM

It was unfair to list GWTW alongside those dreary monochrome movies.

Technicolor should have had their own category!

by Anonymousreply 100November 26, 2022 1:02 AM

You bet your ass, r99!

by Anonymousreply 101November 26, 2022 1:04 AM

Isn't it...?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 102November 26, 2022 1:09 AM

That was 1935 (R102)

by Anonymousreply 103November 26, 2022 1:10 AM

I know, r103....wrong thread.

by Anonymousreply 104November 26, 2022 1:17 AM

R104. Oh - well, it's a great number, anyhow. :)

by Anonymousreply 105November 26, 2022 1:21 AM

On Your Toes

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 106November 26, 2022 1:47 AM

I have sheet music for "Slaughter on Tenth Avenue". If I remember correctly it has a part that says, "He dances with Vera's dead body".

by Anonymousreply 107November 26, 2022 1:53 AM

[quote]He dances with Vera's dead body

My goodness, she wasn't *that* bad a dancer.

by Anonymousreply 108November 26, 2022 1:57 AM

Jesse James

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 109November 26, 2022 2:07 AM

:THE RAINS CAME was the last of the great '30s disaster films, and in return for sending Tyrone Power to MGM for MARIE ANTOINETTE (1938) Fox got Myrna Loy and director Clarence Brown. It's one of Loys best performances. The film is best known for beating THE WIZARD OF OZ for best special effects (for a sequence lasting under 10 minutes). You can't judge it from the muddy print on YouTube. See it in a clear, 35 mm print on the big screen and you'll see why it won.

by Anonymousreply 110November 26, 2022 2:17 AM

The Old Maid

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 111November 26, 2022 2:21 AM

And The Women!

by Anonymousreply 112November 26, 2022 2:25 AM

1940 wasn't too shabby either. Maybe not all as well-remembered as a few from 1939, but a staggering list of moviemaking excellence. I think there was something about the extreme turmoil in Europe and the pending US involvement that spurred the studios into overdrive as if the world might come to an end.

The Grapes of Wrath

Rebecca

The Letter

The Mark of Zorro

Kitty Foyle

The Philadelphia Story

Pinocchio

Boom Town

HIs Girl Friday

The Great Dictator

My Little Chickadee

My Favorite Wife

Strike Up the Band

Our Town

Waterloo Bridge

The Shop Around the Corner

Remember the Night

Pride and Prejudice

Tin Pan Alley

The Sea Hawk

Northwest Passage

Foreign Correspondent

Fantasia

All This and Heaven, Too

The Mortal Storm

Knute Rockne, All-American

Young Tom Edison

Broadway Melody of 1940

The Long Voyage Home

They Drive By Night

The Great McGinty

Santa Fe Trail

Arise, My Love

The Thief of Baghdad

The Westerner

by Anonymousreply 113November 26, 2022 3:27 AM

[quote]there were some theaters that showed old movies 24/7 for a cheap price. They had a specific name, but darn it, I can't remember it.

The baths.

by Anonymousreply 114November 26, 2022 3:37 AM

A revival house I have *very* fond memories of...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 115November 26, 2022 4:43 AM

R115 I have fond memories of it, too, even though I only saw two double features there, back in the early 80s.

by Anonymousreply 116November 26, 2022 12:53 PM

The Regency was the first theater where I ever saw THE WOMEN. I was shocked that the film had never played on TV in my childhood as far as I could remember so it was all new to me. This was in 1977 (IIRC) when THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT first appeared and I also saw Norma Shearer in that brief but unforgettable appearance in the clip of Clark Gable singing "Puttin' on the Ritz" in IDIOT's DELIGHT. It's basically just a reaction shot but so memorable. Once again, I was surprised that I'd never seen the film on TV.

Did Norma have some weird control over keeping her films from being shown on TV in the 50s and 60s?

by Anonymousreply 117November 26, 2022 2:35 PM

R117 I think MGM didn't sell it's back catalog to TV as soon as other studios did. Like Paramount, who did it almost when TV came in. I'm not sure about that. But in Boston after the popularlity of That's Entertainent (which came out in 1974) WCRB, Channel 5, had as show called The Great Entertainment, which showcased old MGM movies, generally 4 per weekend. With a host. So I was seeing them already at that time, including the ones you mentioned.

by Anonymousreply 118November 26, 2022 2:48 PM

I forgot to add Casablanca!

by Anonymousreply 119November 26, 2022 3:28 PM

It's funny though, you'd think a case could be made for 1938 - just one year earlier - yet that was not a very impressive year at all compared to '39.

by Anonymousreply 120November 26, 2022 3:44 PM

R113 That is a pretty amazing lineup.

That last frame of The Westerner is both exciting and poignant for what it prophesied about America's future, and for its indigenous peoples. Beautifully underplayed, another top notch effort by William Wyler. It's no small mark of versatility to be able to move between material like The Westerner to Wuthering Heights to Funny Girl to The Best Years of Our Lives to The Children's Hour.

Wyler deserves his own thread.

by Anonymousreply 121November 26, 2022 7:14 PM

Yes, Wyler may deserve his own thread but he said in that one hour doco on him that he "doesn't have a signature".

by Anonymousreply 122November 26, 2022 9:23 PM

Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 123November 27, 2022 7:23 AM

The Story of Vernon and Irene Castle

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 124November 27, 2022 8:43 PM

That was by far, Fred and Ginger's worst effort, r124. Maybe their only bad film, truly ill-conceived.

by Anonymousreply 125November 27, 2022 8:49 PM

R122 - Hence, his versatility. That's the point. His only signature is his skill.

by Anonymousreply 126November 28, 2022 12:03 AM

I don't like it, R126.

He wasted too much of his career on small movies when his talented refinement would have been much more useful on big, money-making movies.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 127November 28, 2022 12:06 AM

^You have to remember that the studio system was in full force and did what he was told.

He won 3 Best Director Oscars, and the list of his "big" films is quite long enough to halo any lifetime career.

by Anonymousreply 128November 28, 2022 12:12 AM

Susannah of the Mounties

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 129November 28, 2022 12:25 AM

R110 There's a great print on YouTube:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 130November 28, 2022 12:55 AM

THESE GLAMOUR GIRLS

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 131November 28, 2022 3:25 AM

(r118) That was actually WCVB in Boston and the host was Frank Avruch.

by Anonymousreply 132November 28, 2022 3:55 AM

R130 Look at the 1.14 minutes to see Tyrone Power at his most gorgeous.

And also you'll see where his fake denture is showing.

by Anonymousreply 133November 28, 2022 8:45 AM

R132 Correct, I knew it was FA but didn't think that would mean anything to anyone. WCRB is a radio station, oops.

by Anonymousreply 134November 28, 2022 12:42 PM

3 Smart Girls Grow Up

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 135November 28, 2022 9:41 PM

[quote]I forgot to add Casablanca!

Made in 1942.

by Anonymousreply 136November 28, 2022 10:02 PM

R127 That's not uncommon, either in Hollywood. People broke in at the bottom and did small shit until they got the bigger stuff. Look at George Stevens - early thirties mostly small comedy stuff, then in the mid-thirties he got Alice Adams, then went on to Swing Time, Gunga Din, Penny Serenade, and eventually, in my opinion his magnum opus, A Place in the Sun, with stops in between for Woman of the Year, Vivacious Lady, A Damsel in Distress, The Talk of the Town, I Remember Mama, etc. He worked with big stars: Grant, Hepburn (K.), Stanwyck, Dunne, Tracy, Astaire-Rogers, Lombard, Stewart, Jean Arthur, Joel McCrae - ending up with Taylor and Clift.

The huge face closeup in A Place in the Sun was his innovation, it was thought risky, although with two faces like Taylor's and Clift's at their youthful peak, he probably figured it couldn't not work.

Starting out with Laurel and Hardy and ending up with material like An American Tragedy for a film and that lineup . . . it's one of my favourite American films, by the way.

John Ford broke in with all those Harry Carey westerns and silents from around 1917 or so. Then in the thirties after more than a decade, he landed more prestigious projects like Arrowsmith, which got a Best Picture nomination. Then in 1935 he did "The Informer" and got his first award for Best Director.

But he'd been at it since around the end of WWI. It was the way the system worked.

by Anonymousreply 137November 28, 2022 11:18 PM

I was in THREE major hits in 1939 and you bitches can only mention Vivien Leigh? Yes, three - Dark Victory, The Old Maid and The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 138November 28, 2022 11:33 PM

People forget that until the early 1920s when the studio system really solidified, Hollywood was letting anybody have a shot--a lot of people who later became A-list directors, producers, actors, came from nowhere and nothing but got in on the ground floor. It's not like now, when those without connections have a better chance of getting struck by lightning than getting their big break.

by Anonymousreply 139November 28, 2022 11:53 PM

[quote]I was in THREE major hits in 1939 and you bitches can only mention Vivien Leigh? Yes, three - Dark Victory, The Old Maid and The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex.

Plus you'd already won your Oscar for Scarlett, Bette @ r138...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 140November 29, 2022 12:49 AM

R137 Why do you say Stevens "ended up" with A Place In The Sun, when he still had a couple of his greatest films ahead of him, Shane and Giant (as well as a few others). Maybe I'm misundertanding...? I realize you, personally, think APITS was his zenith, but his career didn't end with the film and went on a couple more decades.

by Anonymousreply 141November 29, 2022 1:47 AM

Dark Victory was amazing

by Anonymousreply 142November 29, 2022 1:54 AM

1950 was no slouch; I'd put it second to 1939.

All About Eve (iconic)

Annie Get Your Gun (legendary if not iconic)

The Asphalt Jungle (iconic)

The Big Lift (a good flick)

Born Yesterday (iconic)

Father of the Bride (very good to iconic)

Harriet Craig (well, Joan was nominated...)

Summer Stock (iconic is some ways)

Sunset Boulevard (iconic)

by Anonymousreply 143November 29, 2022 2:11 AM

r142- It sucked rocks, darling.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 144November 29, 2022 2:20 AM

R144 Didn't Tallulah's stage version run for like, 32 performances?

by Anonymousreply 145November 29, 2022 2:32 AM

The *only* iconic thing about Summer Stock, r143, is Get Happy.

by Anonymousreply 146November 29, 2022 2:41 AM

R145 Like, I'm not sure

by Anonymousreply 147November 29, 2022 2:49 AM

3 hits?!? What about Juarez!!!

by Anonymousreply 148November 29, 2022 3:05 AM

Ya want Juarez, Bette?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 149November 29, 2022 3:22 AM

[quote]Harriet Craig (well, Joan was nominated...)

If she was nominated for something for that film, it wasn't an Oscar. The 1950 Best Actress field was Judy Holliday (winner, Born Yesterday), Eleanor Parker (Caged), Gloria Swanson (Sunset Blvd.), and both Anne Baxter and Bette Davis (All About Eve).

Crawford's three Oscar nominations, very close together, were for Mildred Pierce, Possessed, and Sudden Fear.

by Anonymousreply 150November 29, 2022 5:15 AM

The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 151November 29, 2022 5:22 AM

R141 I thought APITS was a better film than Shane and Giant, but you're correct that those were major films and still ahead of him. But a full list wasn't the point of my post: it was in response to the poster criticising my admiration for Wyler because he made some small films unworthy of his talents. I only wanted to point out that in the Hollywood of the day, directors, like actors, mostly broke in at the bottom and did what they studios told them to do, and that included not only Wyler, but luminaries like Ford and Stevens.

I thought APITS Stevens' best (although it deviated in a couple of significant ways from the original novel); you're free to disagree with me. But what his best film was really wasn't the point of my post. It was to draw an arc from the idiot stuff he had to do first, ditto Ford, before they were given the chance to hit their stride.

by Anonymousreply 152November 29, 2022 2:49 PM

"In Name Only" with Carole Lombard, Cary Grant and Kay Francis. It was superb.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 153November 29, 2022 2:54 PM

[quote] Wyler because he made some small films unworthy of his talents.

Wyler's small films in the sixties may have been satisfactory but they weren't using his talent to the greatest advantage.

Ben-Hur brought in 146 million and 'Funny Girl' 58.5.

I never saw Wyler's last film.

by Anonymousreply 154November 29, 2022 9:33 PM

R147 I hate people like you.

by Anonymousreply 155November 29, 2022 9:35 PM

R147 Actually, I just hate you,personally.

by Anonymousreply 156November 29, 2022 9:36 PM

Many directors lose it,later in life. Not all, but Wyler, Stevens, Cukor, Hawks, Capra, Wilder, Minnelli , Lang (Fritz, and Walter, both) and Hitchcock were some whose best work was when they weren't old men.

by Anonymousreply 157November 29, 2022 9:43 PM

1982 was great:

E.T.

Gandhi

Tootsie

Victor/Victoria

Blade Runner

Sophie's Choice

Diner

The King of Comedy

Tron

Fast Times at Ridgemont High

Poltergeist

by Anonymousreply 158November 29, 2022 9:44 PM

[quote]You forgot THE WOMEN, OP!

I think it's wrong. Shockingly wrong!

by Anonymousreply 159November 29, 2022 9:52 PM

The infamous "Box-Office Poison" ad came out in May 1938. Some of the actors listed had comeback hits in 1939 - Garbo, Dietrich, and maybe even Crawford. Other careers never recovered.

I think Dietrich had the shrewdest comeback. She realized the World Weary Woman of Mystery thing was played out and went full-blown American in Destry.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 160November 29, 2022 10:00 PM

I think 1935 was a great year.

Movies included Mutiny On The Bounty, Captain Blood, A Tale Of Two Cities, Anna Karenina, Les Miserables, Top Hat, David Copperfield, China Seas, Naughty Marietta, The Crusades, Goin' To Town (Mae West), Bride Of Frankenstein, The Informer, The 39 Steps, She, Mad Love, The Farmer Takes A Wife (Henry Fonda film debut), Alice Adams, Steamboat Round The Bend, The Dark Angel, A Night At The Opera, Annie Oakley (Stanwyck), Ah, Wilderness!, Bordertown (Muni & B. Davis), Dangerous (Davis), The Devil Is A Woman (Dietrich), The Good Fairy (Margaret Sullavan), The Lives Of A Bengal Lancer, The Man On The Flying Trapeze (W. C. Fields).

by Anonymousreply 161November 30, 2022 1:18 AM

Dear, R161, you sound like one of those 'What-abouters'

by Anonymousreply 162November 30, 2022 1:20 AM

Really, r162. C'mon, r161, Mad Love? Steamboat Round The Bend?

by Anonymousreply 163November 30, 2022 1:29 AM

some consider his 1965 film The Collector one of his most notable achievements. He received an Oscar nomination for directing.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 164November 30, 2022 1:29 AM

R164 I'm not complaining about the quality of it.

I am regretting that he could have spend the last decade of his career doing more exciting, interesting, bigger and more profitable productions.

by Anonymousreply 165November 30, 2022 1:36 AM

R163 Was every film from1939 GWTW or Wuthering Heights? I listed a lot of films from 1935, so? Mad Love isn't good entertainment? Steamboat was directed by John Ford and starred Will Rogers, it wasn't a piece of shit. But go ahead and pick out some films from the year that you don't think are up to a lot of the others, without mentioning all the great classics.

by Anonymousreply 166November 30, 2022 1:43 AM

With all these 1930s film fans on here I have a question please. It is often explained that many films made in 1930-31 as musicals had the songs cut prior to release because musicals quickly "fell out of favor" with audiences at the time. But it is never really explained why this happened? And that the same films remained intact overseas where this musical "backlash" apparently did not occur. But what was behind all of this? Seems very drastic and sudden.

by Anonymousreply 167November 30, 2022 6:39 AM

[quote] All the Jews had arrived from Paris, Hungary, London, Lisbon. That's why!

And also the non-Jews who didn't want to stay in France (which Hitler invaded in June 1940) and England (which Hitler was bombing from September 1940).

Names I can think of include Gladys Cooper, Benjamin Britten, Marel Dalio (who starred in the celebrated 'Rules of the Game', R39, but played an uncredited bit part in 'Casablanca'.

by Anonymousreply 168November 30, 2022 6:50 AM

1969

Bob and Carol and Ted and Alice

Easy Rider

Midnight Cowboy

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid

True Grit

The Wild Bunch

The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie

Downhill Racer

They Shoot Horses, Don't They?

Salesman

Last Summer

Medium Cool

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 169November 30, 2022 7:11 AM

[quote] The cultural changes that would erode that hegemony - the War, the loss of the theatre chains to the Consent Decree, the rise of a more affluent, suburban, conservative Middle Class with other leisure options thanks to the car and television - were all still in the future.

I like this sentence of yours, R19.

by Anonymousreply 170November 30, 2022 7:16 AM

R150 Joan deserved a nomination for Harriet Craig even if 1950 was a packed year. Maybe if Anne Baxter had gone for the supporting category, Joan could have snagged that 5th spot. However, her biggest snubs were for A Woman's Face, Humoresque, and Autumn Leaves. She was convinced A Woman's Face would net her her first nomination but MGM, as usual, didn't bother to promote her as a prestige actress. Humoresque was shocking because she had the full force of WB standing behind her and the movie was even promoted as getting her a second Oscar. 1946 was a competitive year too but Joan deserved that nomination especially.

by Anonymousreply 171November 30, 2022 7:46 AM

Oh dear, the word 'oscar' has so much currency to so many Dataloungers.

I maintain that that word 'oscar' has as much currency and value as 'bitcoin'.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 172November 30, 2022 8:33 AM

The Astrology of Hollywood’s Golden Year - 1939 by Ray Grasse

Various years have been singled out by film critics as the “greatest” for film production, with some of the candidates proposed including 1962, 1972, 1994, 1999, or 2007.

But the general consensus among most cinephiles have focused on 1939 as Hollywood’s most distinguished “Golden Year.” Consider a few of the entries from that time: Gone with the Wind, Stagecoach, The Wizard of Oz, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Hunchback of Notre Dame, Of Mice and Men, Rules of the Game, and Grapes of Wrath, among others.

Several theories have been proposed to explain that impressive run, such as the fact there was an improved economy taking shape after the Great Depression which gave people more disposable income for attending movies, while allowing for more investment to be poured into film productions. Another factor was the flood of creative refugees coming from Europe that energized the movie industry as fascism took hold overseas.

But I’ve long wondered what might account for that cinematic crop of films from a more astrological perspective. For a long time I assumed it was probably due to the fact that transiting Uranus was forming a trine to Neptune throughout that period, roughly from 1938 up to 1944—and which reached one of several peaks when that trine not only became exact but was energized by a conjunction from Jupiter to the Uranus end of that trine, in late April and early May of 1941, which was precisely when Citizen Kane premiered.

But while that Uranus/Neptune trine was surely a factor, I always felt like there must be something more at work, something particularly strong in 1939.

And as it turns out, there was.

by Anonymousreply 173November 30, 2022 8:38 AM

As I discovered recently while looking through an ephemeris from that period, I realized that throughout the late 1930s and very early 1940s, the United States was in the midst of its first Neptune return—this being the planet of imagination, film, illusions, and mysticism. In the 1776 U.S. horoscope, Neptune was positioned at 22 degrees of Virgo, and throughout 1938, 1939, and 1940 it was hovering around that zodiacal degree once again.

In other words, America was waking up to the imaginal potentials of its own Neptune throughout that period (and note that, with the exception of Jean Renoir’s Rules of the Game, all the “best pictures” I listed above were U.S.-based productions). It was as if a channel had opened up to our collective national unconscious which prompted a rich flood of ideas to come pouring out, many of which have continued to hold a place in the heart of movie-goers around the world.

But there’s another interesting cultural synchronicity I came across as well, which may not be entirely cinematic but is nevertheless worth pointing out. The first U.S. Neptune return, as calculated by tropical standards,1fired exactly on Oct. 28th of 1938, and triggered exactly one more time on August 29th, 1939–the very same week as the premiere of The Wizard of Oz.

It’s pretty easy to see how The Wizard of Oz was an expression of America’s Neptune being activated that second time, with a timing nothing short of uncanny. But did anything of Neptunian importance happen close to the date of that first exact return?

As it turned out, it was just about 48 hours after the return of Oct. 28th1938 that a young Orson Welles performed his infamous “War of the Worlds” radio broadcast, in which millions of U.S. citizens were fooled into thinking we were being attacked by aliens from the planet Mars. One would be hard-pressed to imagine a more fitting example of Neptune’s deceptive side than masses of people being fooled into believing something that was actually a complete illusion—an illusion about the planet Mars, no less (which Neptune closely squares in the natal U.S. horoscope, fittingly).2

One final note: The U.S. is currently undergoing its Neptune half-return, as it transits across the zodiacal point 180 degrees away from its natal position in July of 1776. (By tropical standards, this one is in effect throughout 2021, but according to sidereal calculations will be exact throughout 2023.) Will this period likewise be looked back to by future film historians as a similarly rich one for this medium? And if so, which films or TV shows and series will find their place on that esteemed list?

Only time will tell!

by Anonymousreply 174November 30, 2022 8:38 AM

[quoteHowever, her biggest snubs were for A Woman's Face, Humoresque, and Autumn Leaves.

I would have left out "Autumn Leaves." It's an over-the-top melodrama, the kind of movie that rarely gets Oscar nods. And our Joan is a bit too "autumn" to be paired romantically with the young Cliff Robertson.

by Anonymousreply 175November 30, 2022 9:00 AM

R175 Joan always felt Autumn Leaves was some of her best work and she couldn't understand why the movie never got the attention it should have since she was awfully proud of it. She felt it was the best portrayal of an older woman and younger man onscreen. I prefer it to all the Hepburn spinster movies from that same era which she was getting nominations for.

Brando was Joan's original choice for the male part but he responded that he doesn't do mother/son pictures. She never forgave him after that and would trash him in public every chance she could get like his Oscars protest debacle or his fat naked body in Last Tango in Paris.

If I'm correct, Cliff Robertson became a dedicated friend to Joan and always credited her for giving him his big break in Hollywood. His memoirs also related the story of how when he first met her she seduced him.

by Anonymousreply 176November 30, 2022 9:12 AM

r139, do you mean the studio system gave them a better shot, or the lack of a studio system did?

by Anonymousreply 177November 30, 2022 9:12 AM

oh the latter, sorry I just bothered to read your post properly

by Anonymousreply 178November 30, 2022 9:14 AM

Joan at full speed in Autumn Leaves

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 179November 30, 2022 5:00 PM

Gone With The Wind may have opened in late 1939 and fully toured the country in 1940, but even the industry knew 1939 was a great year for the movies. Daryl Zanuck had The Grapes Of Wrath ready for release in 1939 but held it back until February 1940 to not get overlooked by audiences and critics in the mix of 1939's films.

by Anonymousreply 180December 1, 2022 12:29 AM

4 films from 1959 Imitation of Life, The 400 Blows, Some Like It Hot and North by Northwest made the BFIs 2022 list of 100 greatest films. The only release from 1939 listed was Rules of the Game.

by Anonymousreply 181December 2, 2022 4:41 PM

[quote]The only release from 1939 listed was Rules of the Game.

In other words, this list is worthless.

by Anonymousreply 182December 2, 2022 4:47 PM

Here's the results of the BFI poll

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 183December 2, 2022 5:33 PM
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!