I Watch Dead People

Way Out West (1937)

2012-01-20T20:00:00.000-08:00

Director: James W. Horne (1881–1942)
Stars: Stan Laurel (1890–1965), Oliver Hardy (1892–1957) and Sharon Lynn (1901–1963)

IMDb | Wiki

Viewing Source: YouTube

Who is dead in it? Everybody

If you are a new reader of my blogs then you probably don't know that I have absolutely no sense of humour whatsoever. It's no big deal since I'm naturally funny to make up for it. I just don't relate to comedy even though I know exactly what it is and I rarely laugh or smile. I do appreciate Laurel and Hardy though.

Way Out West is the quintessential Laurel and Hardy movie and is the one which I have seen more times than any other. I don't own any of their movies on DVD or VHS anymore but, when I was growing up, the BBC showed everything that they ever made. Tracking down a place to re-watch Way Out West led me to YouTube but I'm not entirely sure that it's legally on there.

One thing which really annoys me is the ridiculously high cost of Laurel and Hardy movies. I would love to own everything they made but, alas, I don't think it's ever going to happen. I used to own two VHS tapes years ago but I'm not even sure if I still have them. Of course, this film and The Flying Deuces (1939) were on them and, really, that's all anybody needs.

Way Out West was notable at the time for the "On the Trail of the Lonesome Pine" song which actually got into the UK charts back in the 1970s somehow when all the movies were being shown on television. Strange things happen in Britain, that's all I can say about that.

The part which always stood out for me was Stan pulling Ollie up through a hole in some floorboards and his neck stretching. Without the advantage of CGI, I'm still not sure how it was done and that's something I like about films like this. The comedic timing was also perfect. I don't know the title of the movie but the one where they were pressganged onto a ship and the scene where Stan was swiping at Ollie with a frying pan was choreographed so perfectly that it's still one of my biggest Laurel and Hardy memories too.

Of course, the plot of Way Out West simply involves the far too trusting boys being taken advantage of by baddies while trying to deliver the deeds for a gold mine to the daughter of a dead prospector with all the trouble that could ensue. It's all ludicrous and slightly cruel with James Finlayson playing an even more evil part than usual and Sharon Lynn as Lola being one of the nastiest pieces of work that they ever encountered. She didn't do a lot for me but it seems that she was a beauty contest winner back in the 1920s.

It's funny that I never realised that Stan Laurel was English until about 15 years ago or that Oliver Hardy had British parents. It probably explains why I prefer their comedy to that of Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton, or, even, Harold Lloyd. I don't even count the The Three Stooges as anything because I loathe them with a passion and refuse to watch them.

I'll bring up more old comedians who I enjoy more than you probably think I would eventually but, suffice it to say, that as far as comedy goes, Laurel and Hardy are still the best.

Way Out West gets an 8 out of 10 from me.

Roman Holiday (1953)

2012-01-15T16:00:00.000-08:00

Director: William Wyler (1902–1981)
Stars: Gregory Peck (1916–2003), Audrey Hepburn (1929–1993) and Eddie Albert (1906–2005)

IMDb | Wiki

Viewing Source: VHS

Who is dead in it? Everybody

Now you may think that it's a bit weird that I have a thing for Audrey Hepburn which borders on love rather than lust, and it's even weirder that I would actually like any romantic comedy at all, but there's just something about Roman Holiday which appeals to me.

I first saw Roman Holiday when I was still a student and it was shown on TV a year before Audrey died. At the time I was recovering from a failed romance of my own with a girl who looked a lot like Audrey Hepburn (plus a six-year crush on another one who looked even more like her). Yes, Audrey Hepburn was my "type" but, unfortunately, I wasn't the type that any Audrey Hepburn lookalike wanted.

I'd never seen any Audrey Hepburn film other than My Fair Lady (which I hated and still do) as it was often shown at Christmas or Easter when the BBC had nothing better to put on but I was bored and gave it a chance.

So began my obsession with all things Audrey Hepburn. I ended up videoing all the films from TV, reading all the biographies about her, and, years later, even collecting the dolls of her from a sale at "Toys R Us". Although she was never much of an actress (as she admitted herself), Audrey was a fascinating and classy woman who went through a lot in her life.

But what about the film? Roman Holiday is one of those "feel good" films which is always a delight to watch. Ten years ago, I was given a triple VHS box set which included Roman Holiday (plus Sabrina Fair and Breakfast at Tiffany's) and so that was the version which I chose to watch again.

One thing which I've always found odd was that her character was called Princess Ann. For those of us who always considered Audrey to be English rather than Dutch, it's a little bit confusing since there is a real Princess Anne in the British royal family who was quite a looker when she was younger (not so much later though). I don't think she was even born in 1953 but it's a strange coincidence nonetheless.

Another thing which stood out was that Gregory Peck was far too old for Audrey but that seemed to be de rigeur for the time with lots of movies featuring relationships between older men and younger girls. It's not overly sinister or creepy in this case because, let's face it, Gregory Peck was a classy actor too and the script never put either of them into "Lolita" territory.

My favourite scene was when Audrey got her hair cut and the sheer delight on her face made up for her inability to act. It was just so natural and made her instantly lovable. The rest of her character's antics were a little bit irritating at times which showed how isolated she had been from the real world. It's kind of like a forerunner to Crocodile Dundee with the fish-out-of-water scenario but with a gentler comedy to it which wasn't so intrusive.

Having been to Rome, visited all the sites and the face thing with the mouth that Gregory Peck pretended to lose a hand in (and, yes, as a former Classics student I should know what that is called but simply don't remember), I was disappointed by the city and its appalling food. Roman pizza is nasty dried out muck and their pasta is overcooked and horrible too. When I watch Roman Holiday, one of the things which it makes me think of is that Audrey must have been really hungry especially as she ended up living in Rome many years later.

If you've never seen Roman Holiday, I'm not going to spoil the ending for you but, suffice it to say, that it was a bit sad but, in fairness, was the only way that the story could possibly end.

Even if you absolutely detest romantic comedies as much as I do, I think it's possible to still enjoy Roman Holiday because of how well it was filmed. Actually, it's more of a romantic tragedy than comedy. The story itself can be argued to be a bit average but such is the nature of a lot of old movies when viewed from a modern perspective.

I rate Roman Holiday as a 6 out of 10. It's not the best Audrey Hepburn film ever but it introduced her to the world in ways that her previous films never could.

King Kong (1933)

2012-01-10T16:00:00.000-08:00

Directors: Merian C. Cooper (1893–1973) and Ernest B. Schoedsack (1893–1979)
Stars: Fay Wray (1907–2004), Robert Armstrong (1890–1973) and Bruce Cabot (1904–1972)

IMDb | Wiki

Viewing Source: DVD

Who is dead in it? Everybody

I wouldn't be me if I didn't talk about a horror movie eventually but this one hardly counts since it's more of an adventure story. It was groundbreaking at the time and is still the greatest giant ape movie ever made.

I have always loved this version of King Kong more than any of the lacklustre sequels, clones or modern remakes. I'm not sure what it is about the stop-motion animation or the improbability of any of it which appeals to me so much but maybe it's because I saw it as a child on television.

Even without the rose-tinted glasses of nostalgia, I still appreciate everything which the uncredited directors did with King Kong as they made a timeless story which has enthralled generations ever since in whatever format they've watched it on.

As an adult with the luxury of DVD, I've noticed a few things which a lot of people might not pick up on although not the alleged "nipple shot" of Fay Wray as she gets out of the water at one point. I was stupid enough to fall for that hoax and spent some time fast-forwarding, rewinding and freeze-framing the DVD but all I got was a pixellated blur at best. To be honest, I don't really need to see Fay Wray's nipple to enjoy the movie especially as I most certainly saw Jessica Lange's in the 1976 remake.

No, what I noticed most was how incredibly flawless Fay Wray looked in every scene. This really was the time of beautiful film stars not ones covered up with so many layers of make-up that they don't even look real anymore.

Of course, the other outstanding thing from the movie was Kong himself. I have very little knowledge of exactly how much work went into his scenes but, without even looking it up, I could tell that it was a lot. Jurassic Park may have had more bells and whistles, not to mention a plot which borrowed heavily from King Kong, but nothing is more amazing than seeing a giant ape fighting dinosaurs from back in the 1930s.

Having re-watched King Kong, I'm going to wrap this post up with the biggest message that I got from the whole thing. Basically, back in the '30s, Americans must have thought it was their God-given right to invade other cultures and steal their monkeys. You would have thought that a film like this would have at least given them a good warning to stop but, alas, it still goes on and the whole country has more entitlement issues than ever before. Even in the midst of now being a third-world country itself and suffering from the worst economic crisis since the time King Kong was made, still nobody seems to have learned their lesson. Just replace giant monkeys with oil and you've got a great political allegory here.

But I've digressed. I'm all about the movies not politics even though there are socio-political implications to so many films which we all take for granted.

Having said that, isn't it strange that Kong climbs the Empire State Building with his beloved or that the Twin Towers replaced that symbol of capitalism in the 1976 remake? Obviously, it was intentional in both cases.

I'm giving King Kong a huge 9 out of 10 for being as enjoyable today as it was when it was made. I wish I could say the same for Peter Jackson's remake but that one is best forgotten about.

Double Indemnity (1944)

2012-01-07T20:00:00.000-08:00

Director: Billy Wilder (1906–2002)
Stars: Fred MacMurray (1908–1991), Barbara Stanwyck (1907–1990) and Edward G. Robinson (1893–1973)

IMDb | Wiki

Viewing Source: Netflix

Who is dead in it? Everybody

For my second film, I went into the world of Film Noir with one of the most revered titles in the genre. Although I was not entirely unfamiliar with this film, it was one that I hadn't seen for so many years that I had forgotten most of it. It was, therefore, time to watch it again.

When I first saw this film I was too young to appreciate how cringeworthy all the high-speed gabbling actually was especially in the scene where Barbara Stanwyck and Fred MacMurray flirted with each other through a series of "supposes". At this point, I very nearly switched it off to look for something which didn't make my ears bleed but I stayed with it.

The main story was, of course, all about murder and collecting the victim's insurance money. With Fred MacMurray playing an unlikely insurance agent and Barbara Stanwyck being a wife eager to rid herself of her husband, I think you can guess how this was going to go.

The murder itself was quite ingenious and they would have gotten away with it too if it hadn't been for one double-cross too many and Edward G. Robinson applying a little pressure as an insurance investigator who just knew that there was something wrong but couldn't prove it.

I did feel a bit sorry for Fred MacMurray as he pretty much failed to get either of the women in the film to fall for him even though he thought he had one of them for sure. I believe the correct expression would be, "What a sap!"

It was a neat twist and as tragic as could be in every way. Of course, it sums up that the world is completely unfair and you can't trust anybody especially women with bad blonde wigs. I've gathered that it's a common theme in Film Noir which makes this genre all very fatalistic and depressing.

Anyway, I actually really enjoyed Double Indemnity and, apart from a couple of ludicrous moments of somewhat stagey dialogue, it wasn't too badly dated at all except, of course, where it had to be.

I'd recommend this film to absolutely anyone as it really is a classic of the genre, was well filmed and thoroughly enjoyable to watch.

I rate Double Indemnity as a 9 out of 10.

Metropolis (1927)

2012-01-02T16:00:00.000-08:00

Director: Fritz Lang (1890–1976)
Stars: Brigitte Helm (1906–1996), Alfred Abel (1879–1937) and Gustav Fröhlich (1902–1987)

IMDb | Wiki

Viewing Source: Netflix

Who is dead in it? Everybody

Well, since this is a new blog and I've moved on from horror movies, I decided to start with the earliest non-horror movie which I could think of. I'm not the greatest fan of silent movies as I'm one of those people who tends to write them off as boring old catshit but I always wanted to see if I could make it through at least one without kicking the TV screen in.

The version of Metropolis which I chose to watch was Georgio Moroder's 83 minute 1984 re-release with its contemporary (for 1984 at least) soundtrack and some colorization. I know that there are now longer, more complete versions of the film available but, to be blunt, if I had to listen to Wurlitzer organ music for over two hours then I think I'd end up slitting my wrists.

Anyway, I actually enjoyed Metropolis for what it was with all the funny, jerky movements and dubious expressions of the actors. Brigitte Helm pulled a particularly weird, winking face at one point which was quite embarrassing but I soon got over it.

The story itself was quite simple to follow. I'd always had the idea that it was going to be confusing but it turned out only to be a plan to control the workers in a futuristic city with a robot taking the place of the leader of their rebellion. Of course, like all mechanical things, it went wrong and everybody ended up realising the error of their ways after quelling the chaos.

There was a kind of love story to it which made about as much sense as anything else but the big thing here was all the visual effects. In stills especially, Metropolis looks incredible but seeing it all moving was quite an experience even almost a century later. I can imagine that, back in the day, the original audience must have been totally blown away by the whole thing.

Metropolis really was years ahead of its time and you don't need me to list all the ways it influenced later science-fiction as you will see it for yourself everywhere. Yes, C3PO from Star Wars was based on the robot but that's the most obvious thing that I can think of writing.

Ultimately, however, I found the ending to be a little bit weak and too easily wrapped up. It needed more tragedy or something since it was all, "Oh well, we made a bit of a mistake, let's all live in peace with each other now and forget about all the years of mistreating the workers and living in luxury while they suffered."

I wasn't entirely sure about the Christianity versus Satanic magic angle either since nobody was either completely good or evil in this film, just flawed in a very human way. I'm sure that I completely missed any allegories or deeper meanings since I just watched Metropolis for entertainment and not to seek out any socio-political message which must have been in there.

Well, that's the first one over. I don't have anything really groundbreaking to say about how I felt about the film other than I wasn't completely bored. Some of Georgio Moroder's music was repetitive and didn't really fit with what was happening but a good 75% of it worked.

I'm not going to recommend Metropolis to anyone other than hardcore movie buffs because it will bore most people rigid or have them laughing inappropriately at the dated acting and name of the robot's creator. It's a good film to try out on your own though to see how much of it you can stand before watching anything else from the same era.

I'm rating Metropolis as a solid 7 out of 10.