criterionforum.org

*swoon* *faint*

An all-time top ten film for me. I had J.J. Hunsecker as my avatar for years. Even though we knew this was coming, it seemed too good to be true. It seems nuts that they didn't involve Philip Kemp in the supplements since he is certainly the foremost expert on Mackendrick, but I can't really complain with a lineup of features like we're getting. It's about time Mackendrick got a little respect. Anyone who doesn't have his book, On Film-Making should pick it up post haste. I never had any desire to make movies myself, but the book kinda makes me wish I did.

Aox, if you don't see Sweet Smell of Success by the end of the year, I'm going to have to ban you from the forum. Sorry.

haha.

already bumped to the top of the queue.

To add to the praise, the film is a perfect display of what happens when career performances and excellent screen-writing merge - the back-and-forth of the two leads is one of cinema's greatest dominant-submissive relationships, and Hunsecker spouts out so many lines you have to wrap your head around to get, he's the embodiment of a tabloid strongman who is well-aware of the influence he carries. I love how Curtis' pretty boy image is skewered in the first scene with him and Lancaster - "Mr. Falco is a man of 40 faces, not one - none too pretty, all deceptive." - and the way he just sits there with that meek smile on him. I could go on and on, if I were to make a shortlist of the best American sound films this would be high up.

It's at the very least among the most quotable

Thomas Dukenfield wrote:That dude from Diner is gonna flip his wig when he finds out Criterion is putting this out.

Criterion should offer an alternate audio track with that character monotone-reciting the entire script.

fiddlesticks wrote:

Thomas Dukenfield wrote:That dude from Diner is gonna flip his wig when he finds out Criterion is putting this out.

Criterion should offer an alternate audio track with that character monotone-reciting the entire script.

Great idea. I would KILL for a Steve Guttenberg (in character) commentary on The Seventh Seal where he just complains the whole time. "What the hell am I watching here? We're five minutes in and I'm already lost!"

oh my

aox wrote: already bumped to the top of the queue.

Same here. I couldn't add it fast enough after reading through this thread.

LQ wrote:

aox wrote: already bumped to the top of the queue.

Same here. I couldn't add it fast enough after reading through this thread.

Advice: Desist and wait. The old MGM DVD has a huge tramline scratch running through at least three or four reels, if I remember correctly. Much as I wish Criterion would get out of the classic Hollywood / studio reissue business, this upgrade will be essential.

To me this film is, along with Touch of Evil, the epitome of late noir. It's so bleak that it's almost making fun of itself, yet it is so refined and has so much panache and style. You can sort of see how noir just sort of "ran out" after films like these, because they were no longer films of the times with desperate, flawed mundane characters that everyone could relate to. Instead, they were increasingly dark and stylized films that ran counter to the direction that the rest of Hollywood was going in.

Perkins Cobb wrote:

LQ wrote:

aox wrote: already bumped to the top of the queue.

Same here. I couldn't add it fast enough after reading through this thread.

Advice: Desist and wait. The old MGM DVD has a huge tramline scratch running through at least three or four reels, if I remember correctly. Much as I wish Criterion would get out of the classic Hollywood / studio reissue business, this upgrade will be essential.

Nah, we all suffered through that shit, so can they. It doesn't look that bad, really. And if this disc comes from the revival print I saw last year, it will be worth a second look, not a first

Yeah, I'm with Domino. I would rather see the film first with a terrible presentation. Then, if I like the film and see it in stunning Blu Ray, I get the added bonus of the experience of feeling I have seen a great film for the first time, twice.

The only thing I can think of that would top that is entering senility and seeing my favorite films again for the first time, but that is 50 years from now.

the movie's so fucking good that I completely didn't see the tramline scratch on the old dvd. Watch it now, so you'll get to enjoy all the anticipation of the title coming out.

Yeah, I actually didn't notice the tramline scratch all that much either; I was too distracted by the non-anamorphic transfer.

(Movie's still awesome.)

Amazon has SSoS currently listed @ $20.99 for the SD, which is about 50% off, and $27.99 for the BD, both of which are far cheaper than criterion.com. I pre-ordered the SD locking in that price.

so Broadcast News and Senso are 2 discs and at the $29.95 price point like they said the sDVDs would be in the future, but this one is back to $39.95? I can see this getting annoying for people who haven't made the upgrade to blu ray.

aox wrote:About this:

the kill-or-be-killed wilds of 1950s Manhattan.

Did this utilize location shooting in the City.. or was it shot in the back lots of Hollywood?

Dood, go a few posts up from your orig post, and read the rhapsodizing for the location shooting-- this film is nothing BUT location shooting.

This is one of those titles where I hear folks seeing the film-- like this and Laughton's NIGHT-- for the first time viz the CC release, and wonder how they managed to hold off all these years. RUN DON'T WALK!

aox wrote:Yeah, I'm with Domino. I would rather see the film first with a terrible presentation. Then, if I like the film and see it in stunning Blu Ray, I get the added bonus of the experience of feeling I have seen a great film for the first time, twice.

The only thing I can think of that would top that is entering senility and seeing my favorite films again for the first time, but that is 50 years from now.

Good call. I'm going to have to take a look at this, as I never have before.

Perkins Cobb wrote:Advice: Desist and wait. The old MGM DVD has a huge tramline scratch running through at least three or four reels, if I remember correctly. Much as I wish Criterion would get out of the classic Hollywood / studio reissue business, this upgrade will be essential

aox wrote:Yeah, I'm with Domino. I would rather see the film first with a terrible presentation

Jesus, this is a terrible presentation?






As for that "huge" tramline scratch in the first three or four reels, I take it this is what you mean (squint hard, this is the worst it gets)?





If this is a terrible presentation, don't bother going to the revival cinemas where actual speckles and real scratches appear... you'll faint.

This is the one major drawback of all the MTI'ing on CC's, etc. The current generation sees anything less than "immaculate" for films over a half a century old as Unacceptable. Which is crazy.

Yeah, I don't get the damning comments either. Granted last time I put in the MGM was on an old CRT, but it holds up well and there's nothing about the transfer that would detract from the film.

Most of these old MGM discs do hold up very well. They're not perfect of course, but I can't think of any that are unacceptable.

The transfer doesn't bother me at all. The fact that it is non-anamorphic does, very much.

I agree with some of the above comments. I just got the MGM copy from netflix and I was surprised to see it was quite watchable. I echo the recommendation to rush this one into your player now.

And the film itself! Rapid-fire wit and acid all over the screen, and in the best possible way. One of the most quotable movies I've seen in a while, black as coal noir, and instantly my favorite performances from Lancaster and Curtis. Curtis being a real misogynistic SOB was effective, to say the least. He does awful things with no sign of remorse, but in a twisted way you understand why he does all this for Hunsecker. That's just how he makes a living. I actually have the strong urge to watch it again, as its pretty enthralling.

Just a few semi-spoilery thoughts:

Spoiler

That glam shot of Hunsecker's sister on his desk seemed pretty unusual to me. He certainly acted like an overbearing father to her, or was there also a bit of a jealous lover thing there? I'm leaning towards daughter personally, but I found that picture odd every time I saw it. Also, I thought the end was brilliant, showing she was maybe a little more like her brother than one would originally guess.

Don't know what else to say at the moment, but I'll be very curious to see those supplements when February rolls around.

I'll have to agree with the most here and say the trimline wasn't noticeable really. It's different in stills, but when the film is moving, it's fairly easy to ignore it. And aside from the non-anamorphic part, it's one of the few early MGM releases of a UA film that wasn't open matted.

Anyways, along with the two Mamet features, there aren't many films in the collection where each line of dialogue can do more damage than a punch and where it's obvious that the writers are in love with their writing and the voices of their characters. And it makes it even more fun and spectacular. This film is practically non-stop and when you think you finally have a chance to breath, Hunsecker or Falco up the verbal ante. Lancaster is probably the toughest and fiercest bespeckled force on screen and when he finally does get violent, it shows how he's falling apart and loosing control over the world he controlled with the words out of his mouth and out onto the page. This film is a perfect example of what inspired collaboration can do and that the beauty in cinema isn't just in the director, but in the team that can help craft the film. Mackendrick is certainly a talent, but without Odets script, the tough producing of Hecht-Lancaster and the wonderful performances, this film wouldn't nearly be as fantastic as it is.

To those that haven't read it yet, the BFI monograph by the always wonderful James Naremore that came out earlier this summer is so compact and full of information that I just fear he's going to pretty much regurgitate it for the commentary. It's a quick read and worth it to hear Ernest Lehman's first meeting Lancaster stepping out of his bedroom with a naked woman sprawled out on his bed and declaring "She swallowed it"!

sinemadelisikiz wrote:Just a few semi-spoilery thoughts:

Spoiler

That glam shot of Hunsecker's sister on his desk seemed pretty unusual to me. He certainly acted like an overbearing father to her, or was there also a bit of a jealous lover thing there? I'm leaning towards daughter personally, but I found that picture odd every time I saw it. Also, I thought the end was brilliant, showing she was maybe a little more like her brother than one would originally guess.

Apparently, the original script had a lot more overtly incestuous relationship between Hunsecker and his sister. I always thought the incestuousness was pretty clear though. A possessive father would probably want his daughter to marry someone more successful or steady than a jazz musician. Only a jealous love would attempt to destroy the fiancee's life and control his sister for as long as possible.

What a fantastic film, and I hope the Criterion Edition brings even more attention to it. Such sardonic wit!! and infinitely quotable, I cannot wait to have this in my hands in HD and watch it again.

The MGM transfer, minus the barely noticeable trim line, was actually very good. I didn't think it was terrible in the least. And knowing the caliber and reach of the films that many of us watch on this board, this transfer didn't come close to being painful. Very good DVD.