Watching films for historical interest

[cateycloggs]

Loooking for some Sunday distraction, I just tried the beginning of a nasty misogynistic film with Bette Davis called 'Mother'. I normally enjoy Bette Davis films but have given up after 15 minutes , has anyone seen it to say it got better? Now have flicked over to BBC2 where A Star Is Born with Judy Garland is on. I was going to say the original but not sure if it is. I understand this is considered a film classic. I was surprised by a fairly long section of still photographs which was beginning to irritate me. The reason I have never seen this is Judy Garland, I cannot bear her voice , and watching her all I can think of is all the abuse and exploitation she suffered to have a career. Hence my historical interest title, I don't know if I can carry on just to enlarge my cultural knowledge. Does anyone else do this? Watch stuff just because it is considered of cultural importance. Even though James Mason has now made his appearance it is grating on my nerves. May give up as I had to with Lalaland the other night (lasted 5 minutes with that). Yeah I know I am not obliged but it entertains me.

The pacing is different in older films, so you have to be ready for that. I would recommend seeing films that influenced later films/actors you might also have seen eg cool hand luke + oh brother where art thou, or switch blade + heath ledger's joker.

Some seriously good films available on iplayer at the moment - love and mercy or man on the moon if you're interested in modern history?

Thank you milkjetmum, I haven't heard of those films, I do watch iplayer, tried to last night but it would not load for some reason. Sorry I don't mean to sound like a newbie to watching old films, many of them I was there first time around. As you seem to be the only person interested may I ask, do you have physical as well as emotional, psychological reactions (I'm assuming) to watching films? When I used to go to the cinema I would often leave plunged into the depths of despair but never mentioned it as I was weird anyway.

I now watch them for all sorts of cultural interest reasons from the wardrobe, language, acting styles representation, later revealed info on the actors' reality as opposed to studio representation, role of censorship and so on and on. Basically the sub text.

So I can see this considered a classic as it is a film about film and the expolitation of actors. The decor is fascinating. It is just Judy.
As I said I have a strong personal prejudice against Judy Garland but am carrying on for the technicolour and the knife edge creepiness of watching a woman portraying a woman spinning towards personal and career disaster when she was a woman spinning towards - an early death because of what she did to portray a woman etc.

She's singing again and my teeth are vibrating, so I am thinking about why I do mostly dislike musicals and find them hard to watch. Last Christmas I watched the whole of Oaklahoma! and found that quite horrifying and ultimately depressing.

I was remembering Saturday Night Fever (actually in relation to the working class normality thread elsewhere) and wondering if I was the only person to have found that film extraordinarily nasty and depressing. I mean to myself did not mention it on the thread. Actually do remember some reviews mentioned the unpleasantness at the time, I am that old. And do have

Some films don't age well or don't stand up to rewatching which is a bit sad when we have good memories of them. Eg I love wes Anderson films but was surprised by the homophobia in life aquatic on rewatching yesterday (and stopped watching as a result) which has but a new unhappy angle on grand Budapest Ralph Fiennes for me.

Not sure about physical reaction but definitely different watching a comedy in a packed cinema vs at home. And some films or scenes which have stuck with me a long time by taking me right to the limit of what I could bear (mesrine and django unchained come to mind). But tv can do the same - watched the terror on iplayer through my fingers and some episodes of inside no 9 which really impact.

Try watching The Admirable Crichton. Really interesting insight into human psychology and social class. And no Judy Garland.

You had to see La La Land in the cinema. Frivolous, but ultimately shallow and dissatisfying. Much like the real-life Hollywood lifestyles it portrays, I guess.

The original 1939 version of 'The Women' is well worth watching. A fascinating insight into marriage and divorce - especially the way in which the women were seen as almost belongings of their husbands at the time.

Obviously doesn't stack up to modern day
life at all, but so very interesting to see it as a period piece.

That's what i mean be the historical interest - watching to place the film and what it reveals about the society of the time it was made and how society has changed . I am not sure if I have seen any Wes Anderson film , I may have without recognising the title. I have heard of him on discussion programmes, to me he is modern to you he is already history so evidently different ages which is good as part of what interests me. The homophobia you refer to obviously dates the film to a time (relatively recent) when it was considered acceptable or even required in certain characters or situations. If it was supposed to be a realist film to pretend it did not exist would be ridiculous. It gets really interesting when the director or actors concerned were gay themselves. Like Noel Coward doing propoganda for heterosexual middle class life films.

Talking of which there has just been a scene which would now be classed as racist. After an Oscar awards scene in which I did notice there were absolutely no black people on screen, there was a street dance scene starting with 2 black children dancing with Judy , then including some older black women - 'Marmie' types and baskets of watermelon , all of which I have learnt are racist tropes. At the time that would have been considered a scene displaying liberal credentials. It was 1954 , just pre- civil rights movement in the Usa. Was it directed by Vincent Minelli, no just checked it is the 2nd version, director George Cukor.

Funnily enough, expectopelargonium, i have tried to watch The Admirable Crichton several times on Talking Pictures, I am afraid I found it boring. May react differently at another time. I mentioned Lalaland as thinking it was a version of A Star Is Born but am I wrong in that . I don't think I can ever cope with the pzzaaa I have read of it and saw in the few minutes I saw. Four young women in very bright dresses singing and dancing in an apartment, I do seem to react from my gut when musicals are concerned. Have you ever seen Saturday night Fever (I say 'ever' as it is now ancient history to some)? Would you regard it is a joyous exploration of 70s New York working class life or ... something more?

ChequerBoard, yes I have seen the original Three Women several times, was that directed by George Cukor as well ? As A Star I mean. Stuck it out to the end . The ending is resonant and, as per my previously admitted prejudice, nerve-gratingly resonant. 6 little words, "Hello everybody, I am Mrs Norman Maine." Speaks volumes and full of dramatic irony.

milkjetmum, I have looked up Wes Anderson, mixed him up with someone else. I know I have seen Fantastic mr Fox, The Royal Tennenbaums, parts of Grand Budapest Hotel. What did you mean by new light on Ralph Fiennes. Considering what I have just watched he is a bit of a modern James Mason. Maybe you don't know Mason? Handsome suave, slightly sinister Englishman. I was in love with Mason from a young age but find Fiennes sometimes unwatchaable - couldn't get on with English Patient for eg.

I just think now perhaps the intention was for us to laugh AT Fiennes' character rather than with him? Perhaps only rescued by rf being a phenomenal actor!

For style and history of recent film I think the 5th element is an interesting one, costume design by Jean Paul gautier is fantastic, but for a futuristic film all the military and scientific roles are very male...

sorry not to have replied sooner, went to get something to eat. I found watching and analysing that film surprisingly emotional and as mentioned it reminded me I used to have very strong reactions when I went to the cinema. I began reliving them. I think that is why i stick to watching 'classic' or just old films on TV now. I don't get so involved and kind find an intellectual pleasure in things that are dead and gone. Although I had a visceral dislike of Judy Garland I can't forget that I was watching a real woman suffering - she was very frail and died relatively soon after making that film.

I think I thought Wes Anderson made horror films, did he? Or who would be similar? I never watch horror films or any type of violence if I can avoid it. Was it Batman/The Joker Heath Ledger played. I never knew who he was so was surprised by the grief about his death which just shows we all live in our our own bubbles.

Just realised I was trying to write pzazz as referencing shininess and glitter with ref to Lalaland.

I love musicals, but somehow haven’t managed to watch LaLa Land, or A Star is Born (although like the songs).

The first ‘Coming to America’ has elements that wouldn’t be filmed today.

‘Seven Brides for Seven a brothers’ is another musical with a questionable plot line.

Would you be thinking of one of the more recent versions of A Star, Standrewsschool? I started this thread because i realised I had never seen the Judy Garland one (1954), only the 1970s one with Barbra Streisand and Kris Kristofferson which did not affect me at all. There are several versions - I haven't seen the Lady GaGa one either. But it was the songs in the Garland version that got on my nerves so I was questioning why I bothered watching it. I am glad I did now it is a very rich experience. As I said just the scenic decoration is amazing, don't know if they got an Oscar for that.

'Coming to America' is one I started and gave up on. Didn't Eddie Murphy have a 'joke' about women's feet in that or was that another film? He has made a sequel hasn't he? Probably Seven Brides is another I have part-watched (yeah I do do that a lot) but would think it is disturbing in the way I found Oaklahoma! disturbing. If you think about the times and the setting then it should be disturbing.

One thing amusing but telling in Hollywood films from 40s to 50s is when they are about an 'ordinary' middle class (white) family in some kind of fix but they always have at least one servant, usually black.

I couldn’t watch either the Barbara Streisand or Lady Gaga versions, although enjoy Bradley Cooper/Lady Gagas singing.

Coming to America seems very dated and off it’s time. I have watched the second one, and it’s a slightly cheesey, easy to watch film.

Just watched ‘Hidden Figures’, a fictional account about the African-American woman who had a significant role in NASA. It’s very interesting, both from how women were perceived, and how black women were treated also.

I have seen Hidden Figures on the TV scedule so I should make time to watch it.

Just watched ‘Hidden Figures’, a fictional account about the African-American woman who had a significant role in NASA.

On a similar note, I also remember watching The Astronaut Wives Club which is set in the same period about the wives of the Mercury astronauts in the early 1960s.

It really does show the differences in attitudes from then to now

Thanks , nickmanchester, another one I will look out for. Do you think that it and Hidden Figures can give a true picture of just how cruelly restrictive life in that period often was? When Mad Men first started on TV I loved it but would sometimes have to switch off and catch up later because of the social harshness to anyone not at the top of the tree. I was a bit obsessed with it but found it stomach churning.

Am I wrong in thinking from the use of the present tense you were typing on your phone as you were 'watching' the film?

Because that's no way to watch a film.

But to answer your question yes. I often do watch films that are considered culturally important. (Or 'historically' important.) I can think of no other reason I watched Triumph of the Will, L'Atalante (one of THE most over-rated films of all time), or any of the Star Trtek movies.

And the horror film director you are thinking of is Wes Craven.

For historical interest I saw brief encounter the other week for the first time.

I couldn't get the hang of the plot but the scenes of the high streets shops etc were fascinating. Many of The women had much higher pitched voices as well which is interesting as apparently women have lowered their voices gradually over the decades.

Is that the sort of historical interest you mean?

Oh I didn't read properly!

Yes I try and often can't get the hang of classics.

Did enjoy singing in the rain though. Seen it loads but I think I've finally got to the age where I really like that stuff

How about citizen Kane?
I like the day the earth stood still
Also how to marry a millionaire

DH says the lavender hill mob

I don't think the star Trek films count, to the pp

Especially the one with Spock's rocket boots!

I say that as a hardcore star Trek fan.

The original series was groundbreaking in terms of nichele nicholls, Russian on the bridge etc and of course Kirk's monologues etc essentially criticising USA society and politics at the time it was made

I do love old films but yes, they don't age well do they? Most 80s brat pack films make me cringe now, I watched Breakfast at Tiffany's recently for the first time and I had to switch it off. I hated it.

Talking of Judy Garland I'd love to see a film or documentary about The Wizard of Oz, I'm not a fan of the film but I've always found the making of it morbidly fascinating.

My fair lady? She should have married the young fella the old guy was a bastard

Amazing costumes at the races