The Big Sleep (1946) and (1978)

The Big Sleep (1946) and (1978) - the medium snooze

I tried to watch both versions of “The Big Sleep” in close proximity to each other. I am very glad I went with 1946 first. I suspect the 1978 version more closely mimics the more lurid details of the Raymond Chandler novel, but salacious content does not make an interesting movie.

1946 is a great noir movie. 1978 is like watching a double episode of Falcon Crest; rather than noir, it is taupe.

In 1946, we had a 47 year old Humphrey Bogart playing alongside his new bride, the 22 year old Lauren Bacall. Bogart and Bacall are captivating. The rest of the cast is on their game and into the story. It is a blast from top to bottom. You really come to feel conflicted about Bacall’s character and her intentions. The two bit players that are the main bad guy’s henchmen are a hoot. This thing is funny and intense and the dialog is great.

In 1978, we have a 61 year old Robert Mitchum playing against and along with a 37 year old Sarah Miles - and everybody looks like they just finished a large turkey dinner and missed their nap time. Even Oliver Reed & Joan Collins are sleepwalking through it. The only character that is alive is Candy Clark’s ‘Camilla Sternwood’ - and she is a lunatic - so tonally out of step with everyone else it is ridiculous. She looks like she is doing a coked up version of her Oscar nominated part from “American Graffiti”.

In 1946, Howard Hawks directed the screenplay by William Faulkner (yes, that Faulkner), the amazing Leigh Bracket, and Jules Furthman. In 1978, we had writer / director / producer Michael Winner. I think he needed to give up the director job. He hits all the story beats - the sets and locations are great - but his performers are dead on their feet. Really good actors performing in such a way that was less interesting than watching those YouTube videos on rust removal = poor direction. Like Star Wars episode 1,2,3.

Comments

Big Deal on Madonna Street (1958) - it is a good deal better than the remakes

I got around to watching the original 1958 comedy caper film - the one that "Welcome to Collinwood" was pantomiming. "Big Deal on Madonna Street" is hilarious. It is 25 minutes longer than the remake and never once did I feel the need to check my watch. I even paused to go refill my water glass. There will be no problem telling who is who or how the story goes - it is well shot and characters are unique. The story is a simple and fun. Comparing the "BDoMS" and "WtC" - they are identical in terms of characters and scenes. "Big Deal on Madonna Street" street is terrific, and "WtC" is a slog. The biggest difference is seen in the dialog. In "Big Deal" the people just talk, like you might expect people to talk. They are funny, but not odd. The colloquialisms happen, but they aren't hard to see through. In "WtC", they are using a vernacular to make sure you are immersed deep in an Eastern European ethnic nei...

Lara Croft vs. Tony Stark - a comparison of Earth's mightiest defenders

I watched “Lara Croft: Tomb Raider” (2001) recently. It is not nearly the deep exploration of the human psyche I remembered. Maybe that is why I had time to think that her story has a lot of similarities to the MCU Iron Man, just smashed into a single movie. There is not the same degree of character growth for Croft as for Stark, but there is an archetype here that stuck me. They are both: Athletic with distinctly styled dark brown hair Exceptionally smart & adventurous Utilize clever tools and gadgets Snarky / Funny / Patronizing to the people around Attended to by an attractive personal assistant Rich / Entitled / Play(boy/girl) / Philanthropist-ish Compelled to protect the world from BIG evil Driven by living up to a relationship with father In terms of contrasts: Laura Croft rides a motorcycle, listens to hip-hop and talks with a posh (and yet reed thin) English accent. Tony Stark was able to build [a hockey puck sized nuclear reactor] in a cave! With a box of scraps! (Jef...

Running with the Devil (2019) - Ok folks, let's make a ¿something?

How do you take a 100 minute movie with Nick Cage, Larry Fishburne, Leslie Bibb, and Barry Pepper - as well as Cole Hauser, Adam Goldberg and Peter Facinelli - and somehow make an unwatchable stew of tones and over the top cliches? I think you give it to a TV director, TV writer, and TV editor. I could not actually finish it. Even for me, that is pretty bad. It is a series of scenes that could have been part of a TV-series, but they weren’t. They were just the beats from a TV-series. Maybe it was put together by some people who read the wikipedia article for “Traffic” (2000) - then sketched a storyboard for a telenovela - then remembered they were making a movie and just cut it back down from there. It is like it has been sequentially translated into 2 different languages, each time by someone who wasn’t a native speaker. Set designs were thrifty, but not too cheap. Cinematography is somehow gray and lurid at the same time. If there was a highlight, it is the music. It was the onl...

Robs takes on Media and Entertainment

Search This Blog