The Broadway Melody of 1929 - 2nd Best Picture Winner

The Broadway Melody of 1929 - 2nd Best Picture Winner
1929
#28

Starring:
Anita Page
Bessie Love
Charles King
Jed Prouty
Kenneth Thomson (uncredited)

Directed By:
Harry Beaumont

1928-29 Academy Awards
Winner:
Outstanding Picture

Other Films Nominated:
Alibi
The Hollywood Revue of 1929
In Old Arizona
The Patriot

Our story is, like the plot of Wings, one that is old. That of trying to "make it" somewhere. In this case, two performing sisters, the Mahoneys - Harriet “Hank” and her younger sister Queenie, come to NYC to try and make it on Broadway. The film chronicles some of what they go through working in the theater.

Hank’s fiancé Eddie is an actor and a singer and has brought the girls to New York to be part of a revue about to open, though their Uncle Jed would like them to go back out on the road with an offer of a 30-show job. When Eddie sees Queenie, now grown up since he last saw her, he falls for her but she knows her sister is in love with him and so won’t allow it to happen. Eddie brings them to a rehearsal and gets them an audition for the show but when the director only wants the younger, prettier Queenie, there is trouble. She refuses to work for him w/out her older sister so he hires both. Eddie sees what Queenie does for her sister and he falls for her even more. When the number in the show with both sisters is cut, Queenie is given a bigger role when another girl gets hurt. She captivates everyone and catches the eye of an investor on the show, Jock Warriner. As she begins to spend more time with him, partly in an effort to hide her feelings for Eddie, Hank and Eddie warn Queenie about him because they know that Jock is only interested in her for her looks and isn’t the kind of man that marries.

When Queenie lashes out at Eddie for his criticism of Jock and runs off, Hank realizes that her sister and fiancé are in love with each other and tells Eddie that she never really loved him so that he will go after Queenie. Once he leaves, she has an emotional breakdown but eventually calls their Uncle Jed to accept his job offer.

Later, Hank decides to hold a surprise party for Queenie’s birthday but Queenie goes to a lavish party Jock set up for her in the new apartment he has bought her. Jock insists they should be alone for a while and tries to make and advance on her but she resists. He claims that she “owes” him for everything and tries to force her but Eddie comes to her rescues and tries to fight Jock. They tussle but Jock wins and throws Eddie out. He takes off and Queenie throws everything back at Jock and goes with Eddie.

Some months later, the newly married Eddie and Queenie come back to see Hank and her new dance partner off as they set out on the road with their act.

Ok. So...how did this beat out all the others to be the best picture winner? Honestly it isn't that great. Didn't feel grand or fresh or honestly worthy of high awards. According to my research *coughWikipediacough* the film’s original release also included an early, two color (red and green) Technicolor sequence for the “Wedding Of The Painted Doll” song number but this sequence no longer survives with any known copy of the film. A quote Filmsite.org in the Wiki article on the movie also suggested that the films nominated that year were all rather weak because of the silent to sound transition and that this may also account for the film’s award win. 

I admit that some 84 years later it may not feel to me to be so wonderful because I simply have a different standard. But honestly, I dun get it.

*shrugs*

Wings - 1st Best Picture Winner

1927

#26

Starring:
Clara Bow

Charles "Buddy" Rogers

Richard Arlen

Gary Cooper

Directed By:

William A Wellman

1927-28 Academy Awards
Winner:
Outstanding Picture
Best Engineering Effects

Other Films Nominated:
The Racket
Seventh Heaven

The first ceremonies where held in 1929 and all films produced in 1927 and 1928 were eligible. The film industry was still young. Films like The Jazz Singer, (released in 1927) one of the most famous of the first "talkies" would eventually become more widely produced (which by today's standards would.be considered racist because of the use of black face, which at the time wasn't considered bad) But the market was still full of silent films, which in place of spoken dialouge that you could hear, used "cards", that one had to read, every so often so that the audience knew what was happening, thought the actors still acted their parts on screen as if they could be heard. The cards also allowed scene changes to be explained.

Now I've seen parts of a number of silent films over the years but I've never actually sat and watched one on purpose by myself, so this would be he first.

I admit that as a movie viewer in current society, I'm not particularly used to having to always pay attention to the screen. We have become so used to multitasking that even when we sit in the theater, our attention is not always focused on the movie in front of us. We have distractions, be it our popcorn and M&Ms, our phones, or other people with us. Movie going was different when this film was produced. While going to the theater can be costly these days, its fairly common place, from the time we are small children. When this film was made, movie going was a luxury. An event. One went to a large, single screen theater, likely only to be found in a city. It was an event for adults. Going to a picture show was an experience.

This being a silent flim, I needed to pay attention so as to be able to understand what was happening. I will admit that it was hard for me to do. Even as I was first writing this post, I was watching a movie, granted one I've seen more than a few times, and I wasn't always watching the screen. I was also texting. Another issue was needing to be able to see the screen clearly. I watched this on a dvd player while in bed but having to read the screen meant my glasses need to be on.

The film felt long. I've sat thru plently of movies hat clocked in at the 2hrs 21min of this film but having to read the cards made it seem longer than it really was. That and the traditional Intermission in the film. Most films of this era include one, because going to a picture show was considered to be like going to a play or a show and audiences expected it. It was a theater going experience like any other, just a motion picture show. While watching this, I ended up needing to take an intermission of my own, as I began to fall asleep. I don't consider that a mark on he film though. I was simply tired.

Our story is about 2 men and the women in love with them. They are both sent off to war, in this case World War 1.

Jack is in love with Sylvia. His best friend, Mary, is in love with him but he doesn't realize it and also doesnt see that Sylvia is in love with his rival, David. When both men leave for war, Jack misakenly believes he's got Sylvia's heart as she gave him a token, but the locket with her picture in it was really meant for David.

The men eventually settle their differences and become part of a flying ace squad in Europe fighting the Germans. Jack still doesn't know that Sylvia and David are in love, but David is too kind to say anything, though we do see a letter between he and Sylvia where they speakc of Jack. Meanwhile, Mary gets a job with the war effort in Paris, driving an ambulance. She meets Jack at a club one night when he is quite drunk and has to save him from trouble when everyone is recalled to the front., but he never knows this.

Later, during a flying run while in battle, David's plane is shot down (Jack thinks because David didn't have his lucky token with him, a tiny teddy bear from him mother) and he finds himself behind enemy lines. He is presumed killed in action. However, he eludes the Germans and manages to steal a plane from them but as he gets closer to Allied territory his plane is seen as the enemy. Jack goes up in his plane to take down the enemy, and he severely injures David who is piloting it. When Jack sets down, he cuts the German colors off the plane as a trophy but then discovers it was really his buddy and then mourns for him. With help, he returns David's body to the Allied forces where he is buried. When Jack returns home from the war he goes to David's parents and returns the bear and tells of his bravery. He realizes that he is really in love with Mary, not Sylvia.

The scenario of misplaced affections is an old story but the Oscar worthy part of this film is the action. There are long shots of planes in the air and even some minor "effects" of weapons fire shown which while by today's computer generated effects is laughable but was at the time hard to do because the process involved marking the physical film. There are also battle scenes which required the work of a large extra cast and that felt very realistic. One feels as if they are in the middle of the fighting. The picture as a whole is a grand undertaking and even now one can see why it was judged the best of its time.

Skyfall

Skyfall
2012
#29

I was occupied with another movie and its premiere back in November when this originally released and while I was away the weekend it came out, my parents, who I'm not ashamed to admit are my regular movie going partners, saw this without me. I had thought about seeing it while I was away, but the plan that was loosely had with my friends didn't workout thanks to some...logistical issues...with our sleeping arrangements. I wanted to see it, of course, but it was destined to have to wait until the dvd released. Somewhere along the line in the months that followed, I added it to an Amazon order as a pre-order to arrive on the day it was released to the public.

So I've had the dvd since sometime in February. Heck I even opened the thing and have been carrying it between my room and the pc with my stitching just in case I found the time to watch it between being on Facebook and reading emails and chatting on Twitter and watching Star Trek shows on Netflix. Don't have any real reason to have waited so long to watch it, I just never got around to it. *shrugs*

Anyways...

So as a Bond film, this is one of the better ones that have been made. Oddly though, it seems rather, I'm not sure what to call it, light? on the Bond-ness scale. You're used to a Bond film with lots of new gadgets from Q, lots of one liners from Bond (along with that famous shaken, not stirred line), Bond falling into bed with so many women you stop counting, and more then a few twists with the familar "dan na dan naaaa" music over them. Those are minimal in this film, some on purpose - one of the running themes is going back to the old school methods and simple, not always super high tech but still very effective weapons and gadgets, right down to Bond's personal DB5 Aston Martin. Like stepping back in time to the Bond days of Connery.

Here I pause to pay tribute to that beautiful old car automobile. She died an honorable death in the line of duty. So sad. Car go BOOM!

But I guess to say that it is one of the better films quite possibly because there isn't that same, sometimes to the point of silly, techno weaponry and nifty gadgets is more than a bit of a contradiction. No exploding pens here. Nice touch with the Bond's palm print only Walther though. The problem with those gadgets, though that are fun, is that they add a level of camp and impossibility to the Bond films. This time around, we've gone back to the basics. No games and toys to play with. Just ordinary badassery.

The film centers on Bond once again defying death, this time to try and protect our dear M from what turns out to be a former agent that she had no choice but to burn to save lives. The good of the many vs the good of the few or the one and all that. How Vulcan. Also to try and keep said baddie from exposing the rest of the MI6 crew around the world, lest they be tortured and/or killed.

Bardem plays our freakishly blond eyebrowed baddie fairly well, though I get the feeling he could've been even more sinister feeling if he tried a little harder. On that scale, he doesn't hold up against Bond villains of the past. He ain't no Goldfinger.

What makes this film stand out is that it is well, simple. It is Bond doing what he does best - taking out the bad guys. 007 isn't "licensed to kill" just for fun. It's what he excels at. Finding and stopping people.

Along with the scaled back, old school tech, we dive a little deeper in the past of the man that is Bond, and not just with the DB5. We go back to where this man grew up, even meeting the man who taught him how to shoot a gun. We take M out of her office and back out into the field (very literally at one point) and we see that time is creeping up on Bond just a bit. He isn't the young man he was. All those gun shots and jumps from places no normal person would ever make are catching up to him. He isn't down for the count of course - his hobby is resurrection after all. As one character says, "Old dog. New tricks."

This film definitely comes across as what feels like a turning point. 2012 was the 50th anniversary of James Bond. You get the sense that they know these films still have an audience but that they need a bit of a dusting off. The push of bringing Craig into the role is staring to lose it's effect. As I recall, there was even some doubt originally if they were going to bring him back for this film. My guess is that he's got a few more in them, if they decided to continue.

Nice to see they've decided to bring back Miss Moneypenny. And that she gets to have some time as a badass field agent, not just a secretary personal assistant for M. I'm hoping they use her more in future films like they've done here. I think she's too valuable a character to be always confined to some flirty banter from behind a desk.

Here's to more martinis - shaken. Not stirred.

My Year Of Movies

I am a movie fan. Or better yet a fan of all forms of movies, tv, music, books - a big chunk of what's out there in popular culture. I've got movie lines and references, song lyrics that get triggered in my thoughts in sometimes the strangest of ways, book characters I love and wish existed outside the pages of their stories, all floating around up there in my brain. A lot of it isn't necessarily going to ever get me a job or help me save the world, but it's what makes me, well, me. I come from someone who is also a fan of pop culture, though he leans more toward the old silent films and TV westerns that he grew up on. It is most definitely from him that I get my love of film. The love of reading comes from the other side - a mom and grandmother who read to me and gave me books at an early age and never limited me in what I wanted to explore, even if it was done so cautiously. 

This idea was born somewhere around the end of 2011 - a few friends and I thought, "Wouldn't it be interesting and fun to watch movies long distance?" Thanks to the magic of the internet and texting, we would all choose movies and then they'd be put into a planned list of dates to watch - we chose Fridays and Sundays as days we all (usually) had free and chose a time that would suit everyone as we are spread across the country. 

(Now I have to stop here and mention that if it weren't for a certain former band of Monkeys (and heck even the certain movies one of those Monkeys starred in) and the great friend they'd lost and his amazing family, we all might never have known each other. How else would people from across the country, who have not much else in common, ever have met? www.spencerbelllegacy.com Go. Now. I'll wait.)

(Did you go? Ok. Now I'll continue...)

And somewhere once this all got started, I thought it would be a good idea to try and keep track of all the movies I watched throughout the year, even setting the goal of one movie a day - 366 (it was a leap year) and seeing if I could even achieve that - or break it. 

Now I'm not usually good at keeping up with that sort of thing. Or at least I used to be. I even decided along the way to track the books I'd read through the year as well. Incentive to keep both lists going. This is where it was handy to have access to Facebook and programs like Evernote and my phone's own document writing software. I'm not sure this would have been possible for me to accomplish if it weren't for such great mobile technology. 

And sure enough, to my surprise, I kept the lists up, even tracking my progress to that 366/one-a-day goal. Needless to say that was a rather lofty goal - and I didn't even come close to making it, though I don't think I did too badly. My final total for 2012 - 210 movies in 366 days, about 0.57 movies per day, so about half a movie per day. (My book goal - 52 in 52 weeks. My final - 37 books in 52 weeks. Something like 0.716 per week - so a little more than one book every 2 weeks. Also not bad, though not as good as I'd have liked it to be.) I tried my best to not watch things more than once, though there were apparently 7 movies that I just couldn't stop myself from watching - or didn't realize I'd seen them already that year. 

Along the way there were all time favorites, introducing the others to some of those classics that everyone should see at least once in their lives, plenty of movies I'd never seen - some to the complete shock of my friends, some I'll watch any time I find them on TV, movies I wonder why I even bothered to watch, and some moments in my life I will never forget, times spent with people that will forever mean a great deal to me, whether the years eventually part us or not. 

Given the success of the first list, I've decided to keep it again this year. For one, to see if I can manage to actually keep it up again, and for another because it's an interesting way to look back on my year that was. (I'm keeping the book list too.)

This blog - I've started watching a certain list of movies - more on that in another post - feels like the natural continuation and extension of the movie list. Here I can try to review what I watch, though I don't write the best reviews, and just in general get the thoughts I have about what I've seen out of my head. 

It will leave more room for those quotes and song lyrics.