Wisdom In This
Not the least bit believable as conversation, and way too glib and oppressively speechy (even by Paddy Chayefsky standards). But philosophically I swear by every word. They're almost guaranteed to make any macho conservative sputter with contempt, but if we'd all be better off if we took the gospel of Charlie Madison more seriously.
Good To Hear<< previous
|
next >>Duke-Outs for the Ages
Posted by Jeffrey Wells on July 28, 2008 at 4:04 PM
comment #1
chappiesan says ...
Speechy, true. But the dialogue is crisp and the message is extremely important, and not to mention refreshing, especially in light of the massive number of shoot'em up, pro war movies that flood the theatres ever year.
Typically if a movie is made before 1970 I have no interest in seeing it, but this one looks great. Anyone know the name of the movie?
Posted by chappiesan at July 28, 2008 5:11 PM
comment #2
gruver1 says ...
The Americanization of Emily (1964). Directed by Arthur Hiller, written by Chayefsky. Starred James Garner, Julie Andrews, Melvyn Douglas, James Coburn, Edward Binns.
Posted by gruver1 at July 28, 2008 5:25 PM
comment #3
Mgmax says ...
It's The Americanization of Emily, and dear me that you've written off 90% of the glories of cinema...
I suppose I could point out to Jeff that the war this refers to, and indeed all of the major American wars of its century, were the work of good liberals like Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman and John F. Kennedy, not "macho rightwingers" like Henry Cabot Lodge, Robert Taft or Ronald Reagan, but....
Posted by Mgmax at July 28, 2008 5:27 PM
comment #4
nemo says ...
"Typically if a movie is made before 1970 I have no interest in seeing it, but this one looks great."
You've got it exactly backwards. Just move that cutoff date to 1980, since the 70s was a great movie decade.
You should have every interest in seeing movies made before 1980. You should have no interest in seeing movies made after 1980, unless they somehow truly distinguish and justify themselves.
Which fewer and fewer do each year, since more and more adults stay home and watch Mad Men, The Wire, Deadwood, The Sopranos, etc. etc. on cable.
Posted by nemo at July 28, 2008 6:00 PM
comment #5
Jesse Perry says ...
"Typically if a movie is made before 1970 I have no interest in seeing it"
God, that's depressing.
Posted by Jesse Perry at July 28, 2008 6:41 PM
comment #6
chappiesan says ...
Yikes, let me backpeddle before this gets any worse. First, that statement really only applies to American cinema prior to 1970. I've seen Bergman, Truffaut, Bunuel, De Sica, Godard, Lang (M might be the pinnacle of filmmaking), and think their stuff is pretty brilliant. But, I haven't found much American cinema that evokes the same reaciton.
And to be honest, the period we're talking about is the golden era for american literature, most of which wasn't put onto film, nor needed to be. If I'm debating between watching a film from the 50s/60s, typically based on a friend's bad taste, or reading someone like Stegner, Styron, Kesey, Ginsberg, or so on, it's almost a given that I'm going with the latter. Only so many hours in the day, gents.
But if ya'll have any recommendations like the clip above (great dialogue, still relevant, and not the over-hyped mainstream crap that most people mention), by all means, fire away. Let the re-education begin.
Posted by chappiesan at July 28, 2008 7:32 PM
comment #7
MarkVH says ...
Not much to add to what's been said except to say that in avoiding pre-1970s American cinema you really are denying yourself some of the great movie pleasures to be had.
But agreed that The Americanization of Emily is phenomenal. Believe James Garner is on record as calling "the only really good movie I ever made."
Posted by MarkVH at July 28, 2008 7:41 PM
comment #8
Josh Massey says ...
"Believe James Garner is on record as calling 'the only really good movie I ever made.'"
If that's true, I'd have to slap him in the mouth and remind him of the movie he made with Coburn just one year prior to Emily.
And by "slap him in the mouth," of course, I mean gently remind him of The Great Escape.
Posted by Josh Massey at July 28, 2008 8:23 PM
comment #9
D.Z. says ...
nemo: My cut-off date is 1996.
Posted by D.Z. at July 28, 2008 8:42 PM
comment #10
quitstaringatme says ...
While I agree that ignoring pre-1970 cinema is a mistake, "You should have no interest in seeing movies made after 1980" is as equally a dismissive and ignorant comment.
Posted by quitstaringatme at July 28, 2008 11:12 PM
comment #11
williamkairon says ...
I lied about rich celebs on ·:*¨ M e e t i n g W e a l t h y.c o m ¨*:·.! Ever boddy knows only loosers would go that ☆☆☆website☆☆☆and only looser with no chance at life or having ever a poor frend would spend all day promoting it ???.
Posted by williamkairon at July 29, 2008 2:08 AM
comment #12
Mgmax says ...
The one thing I'll say is that having lived through the movies of the 70s as they happened, NOBODY thought we were living in the golden age then. Yes, The Godfather was great and we all loved Star Wars, but week to week it seemed like a decade of Charles Bronson and Burt Reynolds actioners, lame comedies of the ilk of Harry and Walter Go to New York and The Duchess and the Dirtwater Fox, Sunn Classic International four-wallers ("In Search of Noah's Ark! Three days only!"), Irwin Allen disaster pictures like The Swarm, etc. It's only when all that stuff fades away that you see the decade as one led by Scorsese, Altman, etc.
So there's hope for the 80s and 90s.
Posted by Mgmax at July 29, 2008 5:16 AM
comment #13
Ghost072 says ...
That is a really excellent point, Mgmax (although I still think the 80's may be screwed).
Posted by Ghost072 at July 29, 2008 5:35 AM
comment #14
hcat says ...
Love, Love, Love this movie. and I always recommend the original Night and the City to anyone looking for an older movie with some bite.
Posted by hcat at July 29, 2008 6:26 AM
comment #15
btwnproductions says ...
Elliott Gould (who's getting a tribute at the Brooklyn Academy of Music beginning this Friday) says HARRY AND WALTER is one of his favorite films. Maybe no one else's.
Posted by btwnproductions at July 29, 2008 6:44 AM
comment #16
Howlingman says ...
D.Z. : nemo: My cut-off date is 1996.
We know.
Posted by Howlingman at July 29, 2008 7:21 AM
comment #17
Gaydos says ...
A good friend pointed out that films which endorse the religion of the time can be hits but movies that challenge the religion of the time are always flops. That dictum provides an interesting insight to the boxoffice success of "Dark Knight" and the boxoffice failure of "Americanization of Emily."
As for your reader's assertions about the dearth of quality American cinema before 1970; may I suggest a nicely appointed Maoist re-education camp deep in the Burmese jungles? It's called Camp Kockenlocker and they've got THX and quality widescreen projection as well as hourly intra-fingernail bamboo shoot injections.
Posted by Gaydos at July 29, 2008 8:55 AM
comment #18
D.Z. says ...
Mgmax: I'm not betting on the 90s, since most of those films were already overhyped as neo-classics.
Posted by D.Z. at July 29, 2008 10:50 AM
comment #19
scooterzz says ...
both julie andrews and james garner are on record as saying that this film is the best (and favorite) thing they've done.
Posted by scooterzz at July 29, 2008 1:32 PM
comment #20
moviemaniac2002 says ...
You can debate the finer points of Garner's
speech all you want...but here's something
that's not debatable.....screenwritng of this
caliber has become a lost art, maybe never to
surface again. Imagaine seeing a major studio
film today like "Emily", with a strong story, characters and finely crafted dialogue.
What passes for screenwriting today is
pathetic....a collection of cardboard cutout
people spouting sound bites designed to pump
up the too-long-and-too-loud trailers.
Okay, so maybe Chayefsky was an angry
pontificating blowhard.....I'd rather listen to Garner
roll through this speech than another summer movie actor mouthing "Let's do this!" or "It's not about me...it's about us",,,or "I guess that would be a no..." blah, blah....
Posted by moviemaniac2002 at July 29, 2008 6:15 PM
comment #21
janee
says ...
Si vous etes interesses par le dossier, ou desirez en savoir plus, contactez-moi par mail, et je vous mettrai en contact.
Best regards,Jane, CEO of server high availability
Posted by janee
at May 17, 2011 7:55 AM