The Man In The Chair (2007) starring Christohper Plummer

I knew I would enjoy this movie from the first few moments it begins. We see an old man (Christopher Plummer) in a theater by himself enjoying a bottle of booze and watching His Girl Friday with  Cary Grant. Then as the credits roll, he's watching another classic in the darkened theater, this time The Last Time I Saw Paris and the argument scene with Elizabeth Taylor and Van Johnson, where Van throws his writings/manuscripts in a fireplace, giving up on his dreams. Immediately, Plummer's character gets up and yells at the screen; we don't hear what he's saying but we can tell he's emotionally affected by the drama (and dashed dreams), and in love with classic movies.

Then the credits montage continues with scenes of him riding the bus at night, and walking down a darkened street, eating lunch outside, or sitting/reading on a bench - suggesting he likes to get out of wherever he's living for a while. He goes to see more films, and the cycle repeats.

It's a bit mysterious at first, but as the film continues and unravels, we learn more about the grouchy old character. He lives in a home for retired film/tv veterans, and has a past career working on classic Hollywood films. 

Meanwhile, we're introduced to another character with a troubled past, a young high school cinephile and aspiring filmmaker, who wants to make a short student action film, but struggles with writing and can't pronounce "Nietzsche". The kid - when he's not stealing cars - spends his free time going to classic film screenings; at a screening of Touch of Evil, he meets Plummer. 

The rest of the movie is about their relationship, and about they work together making the short film which they are both passionate about. It's a charming buddy film about a young movie lover and the old Hollywood vet. As the kid gets to know the old man and his friends, you can sense his inner growth, and begins to consider making a documentary instead. He also teaches an elder to use Google and introduces him to blogging.

Christopher Plummer is very believable playing a cranky old Hollywood film crew member. His character is filled with loneliness and bitterness at the start of the film, but his life changes when he meets the kid; you can sense the spark of life coming back to him. I love the scene where Plummer talks and reminisces with his old, forgotten writer friend whom he encourages to help with the film. And I love how his character imparts his wisdom on the kid as they take the bus around town; he points out landmarks of classic cinema history and tells him stories about knowing Orson Welles. 

Special appearances by M. Emmet Walsh who plays a fellow resident of the home and Robert Wagner as a rich, retired Hollywood producer - and adversary - of Plummer's. 

Filmed on location in Los Angeles/Hollywood.

Written and directed by Michael Schroeder. Unfortunately, I don't know much else about what else the director has made other than some low-budget horror films in the 80s and 90s. But if I had to guess, I would say that this is a dream project of the director's and subsequently went on to pursue other endeavors. I applaud his efforts making this film; I found it enjoyable and very memorable.

Film Critic Roger Ebert didn't like the movie when it came out (see his review here), but I really liked it. I consider it a great tribute to not only the elderly, but also aging movie stars who are often forgotten in their twilight years. 

---

This is an entry in the Charismatic Christopher Plummer Blogathon, hosted by Realweegiemidget Reviews and Pale Writer. December 10-12, 2022

Difference between Sound Mixing and Sound Editing

During the Oscars last week, I once again found myself scratching my head about the difference between Sound Mixing and Sound Editing.

I think I am starting to get it.....but will probably still be awhile until I fully get it....

So 1917 won the Oscar for Sound Mixing, but Ford V. Ferrari won for Sound Editing. Go I guess it seems like the movie with the most-effective use/mixture of crashes/screeches/sound effects is the likely winner? But "Sound Mixing" is for the overall sound of the movie?

I think that makes sense.

Here's a cool clip I recently watched to help me in my never ending quest to understand the difference.

https://nofilmschool.com/2018/07/watch-whats-difference-between-sound-editing-and-sound-mixing


 

Nashville (1975) and Jeff Goldblum as the Tricycle Man

In today's post, the spotlight is on Jeff Goldblum and his role in Nashville (1975), an American satire blending music, politics, and more. The film was directed by Robert Altman, known for his ensemble casts and interwoven storylines. Nashville features 24 characters, not counting cameos and an unseen Presidential candidate.

Jeff's role is smaller compared to some of the others. It's also one of the rare times when his character does not speak in a film. Hard to imagine Jeff not saying anything. But his presence is essential in my opinion.

This was only his 3rd film credit, and his largest role at the time.

Jeff''s involvement in the film is covered in the superb book The Nashville Chronicles by Jan Stewart (published in 2000; Goodreads link here). It's a really great book if you are fan of this film and want to learn more behind-the-scenes stories, and want to read more interviews with the cast and crew.

As recounted in the book, Robert Altman saw Jeff perform in a play in New York. The play, which opened in 1973, was a musical cabaret/burlesque called El Grande de Coca-Cola. Jeff 's role required him dance, perform magic acts, perform various physical stunts, and play the piano. New York Times theater critic Clive Barnes raved about the show in his 1973 review here. Some photos from the show could be found here from the New York Public Library digital archives, and some newspaper advertisements here from the blog It's All The Streets You Crossed. 

Altman was really impressed with Jeff's talents, and eventually cast him in a small role in his latest film project, California Split (1974). The part required Jeff to fly to California to film his scene, even though it was very brief.  

Altman also wanted Jeff in his next project (Nashville), and told him that his part would involve riding a motorcycle. The script (written by Altman and Joan Tewkesbury) was still in development. In the meantime, Jeff eagerly enrolled in some riding courses in New York to begin practicing for his part, but eventually failed his motorcycle license test.

Nashville began filming on location in the summer of 1974. 

When Jeff arrived on set to start filming, he learned that he now had to ride a longer three-wheeled motor bike. He recalls in The Nashville Chronicles, "I wanted to get as much practice as I could, so I drove it to and from the set. Till I sort of mismanaged my fuel tank one day and it ran out of gas on the highway going to the location." Someone from the local teamsters eventually picked him up.

Surely inspired by the quirkiness of the character in El Grande del Coca Cola, Altman also wanted Jeff to include some magic tricks in the film, but wasn't sure when and where they'd be used.  Jeff practiced a number of new tricks and showed them to Altman, who liked them and asked that he bring the the props on set every day and be ready to perform them when the time came. And he did, silly and wonderfully. 

Because he doesn't speak in the film, he's like a mime; he's either on his bike, enjoying a show, or just hanging out.  I think of his character as being comedic relief when we need him, because a number of storylines delve into some serious subject matter (infidelity, exploitation, racism, etc). 

Just seeing The Tricycle Man do one of his silly tricks every so often brings a smile.  

The film never explains what the character is doing in the city of Nashville. Is he a local? Is he on vacation? I don't think we don't need to know. He's just traveling through. And I'm glad he's there. 

At the end of the book The Nashville Chronicles, the author writes about Jeff: 

Who could have predicted that the strange tall guy on the long bike with the funny glasses would endure as Nashville's most recognizable veteran? But the funny glasses and mute posturing of the Tricycle Man concealed an actor with a slouching sexiness and oddball insouciance that came to the fore time and again in The Big Chill, The Fly, Silverado, Jurassic Park, and Independence Day.

---

This blog post is part of the Jeff Goldblum Blogathon hosted by emmakwall (explains it all) and Realweegiemidget Reviews

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) Spoiler warning

Of the films I've seen by Quentin Tarantino, the one that I like most is Jackie Brown (1997); it was fictional but didn't present a revised history of true events like some of his later films did.

So I'm among those who have a problem with the ending of his new movie.

For the most part I like every other thing about it: the story, the setting, the two main characters are interesting (the fading western star and his stunt double) and their lives and careers at the end of 1960s Hollywood. I like how Pitt and DiCaprio are shown in unglamourous moments, and pondering the future of their careers apart from the television shows they were so used to.  In perhaps one of my favorite scenes, DiCaprio takes a lunch break (while filming a western tv show) to read a book, and meets another actor - a young child star who is also reading, and they stop to form an interesting bond before their scene together.

I liked the recreation of 1969 era Hollywood, and enjoyed all of the music and film references as well. My friend who is older knew pretty much every actual actor and film mentioned.

There is an actor who portrays Steve McQueen, and he looks just like him; it was at the moment where I really felt transported into this world and captivated.

So I didn't have a problem with how the fictional characters brush with real-life characters.

But the ending of the film bothered me because it isn't true to history of who was killed and who wasn't killed in real life. Spoiler - Sharon Tate doesn't die; she lives on. It's basically Tarantino's fantasy alternate universe now, as if he jumped into a time machine like in Back to the Future and altered events.

As a viewer I felt like I'm being asked to buy into this imaginative world in which the real-life victims were never murdered, and the actual killers are the ones who get killed. I'm supposed to be entertained by that?

There's something to that ending that I think Tarantino is trying to say but I'm not sure I fully understand. Maybe I'm not meant to understand. Maybe the ending is a dream that Dicaprio is having? That might make more sense interpreted that way.

A new post from A Shroud of Thoughts is a lovely tribute to Sharon Tate, reminding us she was a real person. I knew who she was going into to see the movie, and knew what happened to her. But no doubt, others may watch this film and have no idea. This recent post talks about who's real and who's fake in the film.

The real Sharon Tate may have lived in a "fictional"/ "dreamland" of Hollywood, but she was still a real person, and her life deserves respect. Or maybe a biographical film of her own one day.

Meanwhile, I won't write off Tarantino entirely yet. I will check out some of his additional interviews to better understand what he's trying to say with his film.

The fact that he made a film that has got me thinking after it's over may mean that it's a great film after all.

Here are some of the blogs I recently read for some other perspectives.
- The Collider   Matt has some problems with the ending which I agree with.
- Cinematic Corner - Sati has the same problems that I have with the movie and also talked about audience reaction in her theater.
- Live for Films  Adam echoes some other critics who call it "a love letter to Hollywood… to film making… and to film lovers"; in Amanda's review, she criticized the many female characters whose sole purpose is to react to the men around them.
- From the Front Row  - "Going into a Quentin Tarantino movie, one usually has a certain set of expectations: there will be copious amounts of violence, creative (and constant) use of curse words, extensive references to older films, and lately, a new spin on familiar history."

Bobby Rivers, a teenager in 1969, has a few questions for Tarantino (me, too - the same).
Brian Camp, in his recent post, also was around in '69 and remembers some of the other films of that era.

Keith and the Movies posted about some criticisms of the film:

The author of this Variety article called this "the first dramatic feature about the Manson murders that has a happy ending. Good for him, I guess. And good for us. At least, if you believe that movies should be fairy tales." "Quentin makes the trashing of history look hip....that Sharon Tate “lives” is supposed to send us out on a feel-good cloud (when, in fact, it’s arguably a trivialization of her memory)" - I agree with that.

Blog post by Lazarus' Lair

---

Videos

In this interview (below) from the Cannes Film Festival, Tarantino compares his film to the work of director Claude Lelouch.

Tarantino and the main cast talk to Entertainment Weekly (below)



Below: Cinemablend talks to Quentin Tarantino for about 20 minutes here (Cinemablend is biased and loves Tarantino). In the interview, Tarantino knows his history, and all, but doesn't really talk about the ending.

Sunset Boulevard (1950)

The movie poster's tagline reads: "A Hollywood Story". It certainly is one of the most famous and best movies ever made about Hollywood life, even though fictional, and brilliantly co-written by Billy Wilder, who also directed. Much like "Streetcar Named Desire", it's a film that is just as much about the emotionally-needed and mentally-troubled leading lady (Gloria Swanson as Norma Desmond) as it is about the man in her life who feels trapped and caught in the middle of something he never asked for (William Holden). Holden is an unemployed Hollywood screenwriter who accidentally enters the life of has-been silent film actress Norma Desmond, who lives in her own world and pays Holden to write her comeback film. Co-star Nancy Olsen has never been better as Holden's love interest, completely unaware that Holden has moved into Desmond's home and treated like a king while being smothered by the reclusive's love hungry tendencies. A morality play, about jealousy, neediness, fame, wealth. Billy Wilder was able to recruit some well known silent stars to appear in cameos: HB Warner ("Lost Horizon") and Buster Keaton, as well as director Cecil B. DeMille, who plays an important role in the story. Arguably, DeMille is probably most remembered for his role in this film than any of his other movies outside of "The Ten Commandments". Gloria Swanson herself was a silent film star, and this also her most famous role. Holden and Wilder worked together again in one of my favorites: "Stalag 17" two years later.

Son of Saul (2015) and Hail Ceasar! (2016)

Son of Saul is a  Holocaust story, set in the Auschwicz concentration camp in Poland. It's sad, but a very well made film, directed by directed by László Nemes.

Saul is a Jewish prisoner forced to worked in a crematorium.
As he attempts to give a dead child a proper burial, he finds out that the child may or may not be his son.

As he continues to uncover the truth, he learns that either situation is likely.

The man risks his life devoting himself to the cause of a proper burial, especially during an uprising of the camp that causes many in the camp to doubt his loyalties.

The director's style is impressive; the entire film is told from Saul's perspective, with the camera focused on him the entire time, even when there's horrible violence taking place in the background of the frame.

Read a blog post by Cliched Monologues on this film here.

Read a blog post by Avvaganda.com here

Read a blog post by Korova Theater here

Another film I saw this past week was Hail Ceasar! directed by the Cohen brothers. The trailer showed some snippets of what looked like homages to old Technicolor movies of the '40s and '50s, which really intrigued me. I've seen some of the Cohen Brothers films but not all, so wasn't sure what to expect.

It's an ensemble comedy satire, and focuses on Josh Brolin's character, a Hollywood "fixer" who keeps actors' scandals out of the press. We meet some of the actors he helps, including George Clooney who's playing a Roman soldier in a Biblical epic called "Hail Caesar" (with dialogue very much - almost identical - to Ben Hur); his character is kidnapped by Communists. Yes, it's absurd. There's also a submarine in it. You have to see it to believe it.

The movie also spoofs musicals, westerns, and melodramas, as well as gossip columnists, communists, and censorship boards. There's a musical number with sailors in the bar; Channing Tatum is supposed to be playing a Gene Kelly-type sailor (like from Anchors Aweigh). I liked that the song used was an original piece, not a copycat number from a real '50s musical; kudos to the songwriters.

I have to say that George Clooney in the Roman solider uniform really looks as if he could play the part in a Roman epic from that time period.

The movie is pretty entertaining. A little crazy, but entertaining.  I enjoyed it.

Here's another review, from a blog about biblical epics.

Bobby Rivers wrote about this movie several times on his blog. Read the posts here:
Post 1 | Post 2 | Post 3

How You See It (1936)

Here's an old short about projecting a film on a screen.

Hugo (2011)

Seeing a movie on the day before Thanksgiving has become a tradition for me; tonight I went to see Hugo and let me tell you, I'm pretty sure I've just seen a modern day masterpiece. Hugo -  based on a novel I wasn't familiar with -is by far the best "new" movie I've seen all year, and one of the best films in 3D I've ever seen. From beginning to end I was captivated. Stunning visuals (Oscar worthy for sure). An enchanting story (part fantasy, part adventure, part mystery and pure magic). It's one of those films where the less you know about it, the better it is, so I won't tell you much. Trust me. I didn't know anything about it other than it was was a 3D film directed by Martin Scorcese (that alone intrigued me and got me in the door), takes place in a train station in Paris, and that one of the characters in the story is Georges Méliès, the pioneering silent film director.

This is absolutely without a doubt a tribute to Melies, movies, and movie making. Bravo Martin Scorcese! I loved this film so much and can't wait to see it again. 

 See this movie, and if you don't like it I will give you your money back.

Ben Kingsley plays Georges Méliès. 

Inside Daisy Clover (1965)

Director Robert Mulligan ("To Kill A Mockingbird"), who passed away in 2008, was one of the great directors of the 1960s. This is another one of his achivements, an adaptation of a novel by Gavin Lambert (former film critic for Sight and Sound and the Guardian, and who often explored Hollywood themes in his novels). This story, set in 1936, makes a powerful statement about the facade of stardom and imagery; the "Inside" of the title refers the inner soul of teenage Daisy Clover, miserable and unhappy before famous, and even worse off as a major celebrity.



The Passionate Moviegover in a recent post compared this film to two other movies: A Star is Born and The Legend of Lylah Clare.
(Read the review here)

Another film that this reminded me of is the brilliant cautionary tale, A Face in the Crowd, and the Lonesome Rhodes character. Though they are both manufactured celebrities, Daisy doesn't crave the power and limelight like Lonesome; rather, she desperately wants to get out, even sticking her head in an oven in one scene.

This film that gets darker and more depressing as it progresses (Warning: There may be some spoilers in the rest of this review)



One of the songs that Daisy sings in the film, "The Circus Is A Wacky World", seems to sum up the movie and it's message pretty good.

I was surprised that the film was even released by Warner Brothers, since it's seems to be very anti-studio. It wasn't a major hit upon initial release, despite the fact that this was one of the first films to feature dapper Robert Redford, who plays movie star hearthrob Wade Lewis.



Also excellent are Ruth Gordon as Daisy's mother figure, and Christopher Plummer, who is good as Mephisto-esque studio head Raymond Swan of Swan Studios, a character completely the opposite of Captain Von Trapp from earlier in the year. He had a such a good year that year, I don't know why he wasn't nominated for at least Best Supporting Actor for either film. But no one can argue that last year, 2009, was also one of his best years ever, with roles in Up, 9, The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, and his Oscar nominated role as Leo Tolstoy in The Last Station.

Resembling "Anybodys" from West Side Story (ironically), Natalie Wood's character of Daisy is a chain smoking, trash talking, school-skipping tomboy, who lives in a trailer with her mother figure guardian on the fictitious Angel Beach Pier (which was filmed on the famous Santa Monica Pier).



Gordon's wisecracking mother reminded me a little of her character in Where's Poppa? In one scene, the superstitious woman pulls an Ace from her deck of cards and immediately flees to the nearest Card Reader to find out if she will die. Where the rest of her family is - and where they get their money - remains sort of a mystery to us for awhile.



I loved the scenery in these opening scenes. Reminded me of Santa Monica Pier and Venice beach boardwalk, where I have been and enjoyed.





In Daisy's spare time, she goes to the nearest record-your-own-voice machine and burns records (I almost said "burns CDs") of her singing tunes.

She mails the records to Hollywood studios, including the fictitious Swan Studios, hoping to get noticed.




Daisy plays the records she recorded in in the 25-cent record booth.


As an autograph collector myself, I got a kick out of this scene, where we see Daisy in a boardwalk booth selling black-and-white 8 x 10s, as well as conning people into believing she can get them autographed by the actual stars.

This karma-like scene is an interesting one: she's selling something phony to people, which is what Swan does with her image later on.


A woman asks if her "Myrna Loy" autograph came in. Daisy quickly runs to the back and fakes the signature, like she does for all of them.


Here, she gives the "autographed photo" of Myrna Loy to the gullible customer. (Caution: if you ever stumble upon any autographed photos of celebrities in a flea market, make sure you check it out with an autograph expert or compare the signature to a real one.)

One of her voice recordings lands in the hands of Swan Studios, and, amazingly, she is called for an interview with studio boss Swan (Plummer), who wants to make her into the next big thing in pictures. Daisy in intrigued, and is encouraged by her long-lost sister. As part of the deal, Swan forces her to lie about her homelife and family, and has her mother committed to an institution. A outrageous promotional newsreel is produced (which I thought was a brilliant comical moment--if this were a comedy film, that is). The newsreel is complete distortion of her life and upbringing in an attempt to sell her to the public. It shows her faux "family heritage" and introduces us to a number of her ancestors who were famous singers. The newsreel ends with a movie premiere of one of her films, and we see real clips of Clark Gable and even Mickey Rooney "showing up" for her film.

Her only friend is fellow movie star Wade Lewis (Redford). The film never specifies Wade's age, but he was clearly an adult movie star to me (Note: I believe the original character from the book was also a teen star the same age as Daisy) I found this Wade Lewis character to be sleazy; he's always trying to get teenage Daisy drunk. (Later we discover Wade likes boys too.) And I thought Wood, almost 30, was too old to play a 15 year old. But I was able to suspend my disbelief for most of the film. She didn't really look like a teen, but then again, Deanna Durbin looked much older than her years.



She marries Wade Lewis (and is abandoned by him, naturally), and is emotionally tormented for the remainder of the film. Her fame increases, and Swan becomes more sinister and controlling.



Former child star Roddy McDowall has a small part as Swan's emotionless assistant. (Sadly, we don't see enough of him; his screentime in this two-hour movie is roughly 1 minute and 30 seconds.)

Though the casting of former child-stars McDowall and Wood seem like a good idea for this subject matter, the biggest criticism I have of this film is that I didn't feel like I really knew the character of Daisy to sympathize with her. (I agree with Scott Marks' review - read here.) I really, really wanted to sympathize with her, but I was not convinced that she truly loved singing. Early on, she didn't seem desperate to make it into show business - just desperate to get out, anywhere. She spent most of her pre-fame days selling movie star photos, but seemed so bored. And we don't really get a feel for what she thought Hollywood would be like.

So I didn't feel we got deep enough "inside" Daisy Clover.

In this film, the character of Daisy is on that same superstar level as my favorite teen movie stars of the golden age, who are all still living: Deanna Durbin, Shirley Temple, Jackie Cooper, and Mickey Rooney. I thought about their subsequent careers and struggles. And wondered how much of Daisy's story they experienced.

Once the film ended, I felt sorry for Daisy. I felt it was just a matter of time before this character tries to kill herself.

Another review of this movie from the blog Just a Cineast here

Another review from Angelman's Place here

Another review from The Magnificent 60s here

Silent Movie (1976)

This is my favorite Mel Brooks which I recently re-watched. It takes place in contemporary (mid-70s then, of course) Los Angeles/Hollywood. However the main gimmick of the film is that it's "silent" without any  dialogue. Retro "title cards" are used throughout.

Watch the trailer:


The simple plot: has-been director Mel Funn (Brooks) trying to make a comeback with a new idea for a film: modern-day SILENT MOVIE. He pitches it to a studio boss (Sid Caesar) who is a little skeptical until Funn gets major Hollywood stars to sign up (leading to hilarious results). Among them: Burt Reynolds, Anne Bancroft, Liza Minelli, and James Caan. He even tries to get legendary French mime Marcel Marceau to sign up; in one humorous scene, he calls him in Paris to ask if he'd like to be a part. Marcel responds, "No!" in the only spoken word of dialogue in the film.



Everyone hopes the film will be a hit except for a rival studio who wants the film to fail. The rival studio even sends out a sexpot nightclub dancer/singer (Bernadette Peters) to distract Mel Funn and his bumbling associates (Dom DeLuise and Marty Feldman). The hilarious film is filled with sight gags that will remind you of the classic slapstick comedy you enjoyed in silent movies of an earlier era.

Even making an appearance is Paul Newman, playing (and mocking) himself. When we first see him in the film, he is in a hospital recovering from a broken leg after one of his famous car races, and we see him in a motorized wheelchair. Mel & Co. sneakily track him down, and this leads to a hilarious wheelchair chase, complete with a little Ben-Hur homage. I could also mention several more scenes, but I don't want to spoil it all. See the movie! I highly recommend it.



POSTSCRIPT:

Mel Brooks was chosen to be one of the 2009 Kennedy Center honorees. The ceremony is an annual gala where 5 American showbusiness legends are awarded lifetime achievement medals from the Kennedy Center, a performing arts center in Washington DC. The President attends, and it's always a grand affair. A well-deserved honor for the Oscar-winning filmmaker. No less than three of his films are usually regarded among the funniest of all time : The Producers, Young Frankenstein, and Blazing Saddles.

Watch a clip from the Kennedy Center tribute: