Author Topic: Movies & Books Into Movies (Read 552278 times)

marjifay · « **Reply #440 on:** January 05, 2010, 02:29:46 AM »

So many movies – how do you choose what to watch?
Reviews? Recommendations? Actors? Availability?
Do you choose a movie the same way you choose a book?

And where do you like to watch most of your movies?
Do you stream movies from Netflix and other places?
Where’s the strangest place you’ve ever watched a film?

_______________________________

Flixfind
Internet Movie Data Base
Upcoming Films from Books
Recent Movies Based on Books
Movies Based on the Book

Join us in an ongoing discussion of your favorite movies right now.
Pull up a chair, take off your shoes, pour yourself a cup of coffee or hot chocolate, and join in!

Your Discussion Leader: pedln

I've had THE SOLOIST on my TB seen movies list-- thanks for reminding me! Sounds good, doesn't it.

I OD'd on movie videos over the Christmas holidays. My favorite rental store in North Hollywood closes down for two weeks, so we could have them at the same price for that lenghth of time.

The first was BRIEF ENCOUNTER (1948) with Trevor Howard and Celia Johnson, from a Noel Coward play, "Still Life." About two people (both married, but not to each other, of course) who accidently meet and fall in love. I'd seen these two actors in STAYING ON (1980), a sequel to Jewel in the Crown, in a very non-loving relationship, and wanted to see them in a loving relationship. Interesting contrast. Great acting.

Then I watched THESE THREE (1936) starring Miriam Hopkins, Merle Oberon, and Joel McCrea (with interesting bit parts by Margaret Hamilton and Walter Brennan). Also watch the remake of this titled THE CHILDREN'S HOUR (1962), with Shirley MacLaine, Audrey Hepburn and James Garner. Both directed by Willim Wyler from a Lillian Hellman.play. About how a vindictive bratty little girl's lies destroyed three lives. I'd seen The Children's Hour before, but just found out about the previous film. Excellent acting in both. Interesting to see how the story changes after 26 years, from a lie about a love triangle to a lie about an "unnatural" relationship between the two women. Miaiam Hopkins plays a young woman in the first film, then an older meddling aunt in the second. She's great in both parts.

Marj

Babi · « **Reply #441 on:** January 05, 2010, 08:29:58 AM »

I saw an old Jimmy Stewart movie the other day,.."The Man From Laramie". Still really good. Jimmy Stewart is one who seems to remain
enjoyable no matter how old the movie is. Can you think of anyone
today who seems to fill the kind of place he did? I can't. Remarkable
man.

Frybabe · « **Reply #442 on:** January 05, 2010, 09:47:01 AM »

My favorite Jimmy Stewart movie isn't one of his westerns, it's Bell, Book and Candle.

JimNT · « **Reply #443 on:** January 05, 2010, 01:42:25 PM »

I have several friends who adore old movies. With some few exceptions, like The African Queen and Gone With the Wind, I simply can't develop an interest in them. I've heard from several sources that the 1941 movie starring Orson Wells and based on the newspaper giant, William Randolph Hearst, is considered by many to be the best movie ever made. I've watched it at least twice and clearly remember the last word uttered as "rosebud" but I can't for my life remeber the title. In any event, I didn't find anything remarkable about the movie and have thus concluded that I'm devoid of any artistic taste.

Frybabe · « **Reply #444 on:** January 05, 2010, 02:56:47 PM »

JimN, was it Citizen Kane? I never watched it the whole way through. Orson Welles is my favorite Mr. Rochester of all the incarnations of Jane Eyre.

JimNT · « **Reply #445 on:** January 05, 2010, 06:20:56 PM »

Thank you. I can sleep well tonight. Orson was a heavyweight in every sense.

marjifay · « **Reply #446 on:** January 05, 2010, 07:03:59 PM »

I've seen Citizen Kane a couple of times, but it's not one of my favorites. I'll have to get the Jane Eyre film in which he is Mr. Rochester. Haven't seen that one.

My son and I are addicted to old film noir films. Love some of the lines, such as, from "Cry Danger,":

"Do you always drink in the morning?"

"Listen, If you drink as much as I do, you have to start early!"

Or, from the Raymond Chandler film, "The Big Sleep," where Philip Marlow (Humphrey Bogart) says,

"He's so tough, he'd knock your teeth in and then kick you in the
stomach for mumbling!"

Marj

Babi · « **Reply #447 on:** January 06, 2010, 08:38:36 AM »

There are many of the old movies that are seriously dated and seem rather silly now. I can't say I 'adore' them all, JIM, but some are 'classic' in the sense that the acting and the production pass the test of time.

JimNT · « **Reply #448 on:** January 06, 2010, 11:10:44 AM »

Maybe I should give old movies another try. I have found, as I'm sure you have, that movies deserve as much attention as books. I seem to be watching movies now more than once and seeing certain attributes I hadn't seen before. The settings for old movies have been a distraction to me because they are usually so unrealistic, but maybe I should consentrate on the plot, the lines, and the acting.

mrssherlock · « **Reply #449 on:** January 06, 2010, 01:47:55 PM »

Since the advent of color we have become jaded, I believe. Watching an old B&W movie I am struck by the detail the film reveals. An old Sherlock Holmes had one scene where there were several men with hats and overcoats. I noticed that each coat was distinctively patterned so that it was easy for the eye to differentiate between them. Opened my eyes to the importance of scenery design, costume design, lighting and camera work in a different way than in color. Makeup would have been critical, too, for B&W.

JoanK · « **Reply #450 on:** January 06, 2010, 09:22:52 PM »

" I have found, as I'm sure you have, that movies deserve as much attention as books." That's a very good point. It takes less concentration to watch a movie -- it flows by us whether we are paying attention or not. And with the wide availibility of movies on TV, we tend to undervalue even the good ones.

It's interesting: some old movies hold up very well and others don't. And I can't tell which will hold up.

JimNT · « **Reply #451 on:** January 07, 2010, 07:40:16 AM »

JoanK I agree that old and new movies can be and or often merely forms of relaxation; that we might sit through one without the least bit interest and forget about it immediately. I think that in watching movies we must be in the proper frame of mind to concentrate on every detail, meaningless or not, if we are to thoroughly enjoy the presentation. The same holds true with books. Recently, I read the Reagan Diaries and became bored with the repetiveness of activities but I was determined to finish the book. I did, but I didn't get any satisfaction from the content because I was thinking of the next book I've been wanting to read for some time. There are, however, bad movies and books but sometimes our own human frailties obscure our ability to judge the quality.

PatH · « **Reply #452 on:** January 07, 2010, 09:15:55 PM »

Quote from: JimNT on January 07, 2010, 07:40:16 AM

I think that in watching movies we must be in the proper frame of mind to concentrate on every detail, meaningless or not, if we are to thoroughly enjoy the presentation.

I totally agree, with most movies. If I re-watch a movie, I often pick up a lot of details that matter and enhance.

It's interesting to see what old movies still seem good now. In recent watching, I felt "The Third Man" is still really good, as is "The African Queen", but "Rear Window" is poor.

Marjifay, if you want a really good "Jane Eyre", rent the 1997 TV version with Ciaran Hinds as Rochester. He does a wonderful job of showing the man's harsh, selfish nature (with redeeming appealing qualities).

mrssherlock · « **Reply #453 on:** January 07, 2010, 09:42:25 PM »

Thanks to those who mentioned "The Soloist" on HBO. I really enjoyed it and the short feature, "The Making of The Solist". Looking Steve lopez I saw he was on the staff of the San Jose Mercuey News. I can remember reading hisz farewell column, he was leaving SJ for Philly and The Inquirewr. Seemed to me he was travelling the wrong way but he found himslef in LA after a while. Making had interviews with Steve and Nathaniel. I'm glad I had the experience of watching this so, thanks again.

pedln · « **Reply #454 on:** January 07, 2010, 10:28:58 PM »

PatH, I think that The Third Man was the first movie I requested from Netflix when I first started subscribing. I can still hear the theme song and hope that maybe my sheet music for it is still in the piano bench. Not sure I agree with you about Rear Window, but it's been a while since I last saw it. I've always enjoyed the Alfred Hitchcock films, but don't necessarily want to rewatch some of them. Certainly not Psycho.

Meryl Streep is certainly amazing. A month ago I watched this 60 year-old actress play a middle-aged Julia Child, a superb performance. Tonight I've been watching Evening (2007) and she plays a young 24 year-old bride.

Quote

I have found, as I'm sure you have, that movies deserve as much attention as books

I agree, Jim. They certainly are a legitimate art form. Well, most of them, some of them, anyway. Do you remember the "double features?" For the price of one ticket you would see one "good" movie and then another that was referred to as a "grade B." There would never be two blockbusters together.

PatH · « **Reply #455 on:** January 07, 2010, 11:39:37 PM »

Pedln, I know that the music is still in my piano bench (no, I can't play it, my husband bought it). I love it. "The Third Man" was originally a story by Graham Greene, first appearing in Ellery Queen's Mystery Magazine where I read it before the movie came out. Recently, I both reread the novella and rewatched the movie. Both are very good, the movie better than the book. They're different, though. In the novella, the American Holly Martins gets the girl, at least for a while, with no long-term promises.

I also read the Cornell Woolrich story on which "Rear Window" was based when it first came out in EQMM, and in this case I think the story was better, but I haven't reread it to match rewatching the movie.

To complete the books part, I recently read C. S. Forester's "The African Queen" for the first time. Again, similar but not the same. The movie is really good, worth watching a number of times. The book isn't as good, though it has some interesting seamanship not in the movie.

Frybabe · « **Reply #456 on:** January 08, 2010, 09:31:26 AM »

Pedln, I looked up Cornell Woolrich on Google. A lot of his books and stories made it into the movies. I remember listening to The Whistler when I was little. The radio show ran 13yrs. There were a number of movies based on The Mark of the Whistler.

PatH · « **Reply #457 on:** January 08, 2010, 07:22:43 PM »

IMDB lists over 90 titles for Woolrich. One I remember liking at the time is "The Window" (1949). A young boy, notoriously untruthful, sees a murder. No one will believe him, but the murderers of course do, and are trying to get him and kill him. the suspense is heightened by the powerlessness of a child in an adult world.

JoanK · « **Reply #458 on:** January 08, 2010, 08:18:46 PM »

PATH: I remember that story, too. We must have read it about the same time. I always liked Cornell Woolrich.

pedln · « **Reply #459 on:** January 09, 2010, 12:29:52 PM »

These Ellery Queen Mystery Magazines -- are they collectors' items now?

I'd never heard of Woolrich before, but he certainly wrote a lot of books. Our library has one -- Into the Night. And the old Rear Window video tapes.

mrssherlock · « **Reply #460 on:** January 09, 2010, 01:24:53 PM »

Reading good reviews of "The Soloist" on Seniors & Friends I recorded it and it was a fascinating tale of a musical genius who was eeking out an existance on LA's skid row. The story, based on a book by Steve Lopez, LA Times columnist, starred Jamie Foxx and Robert Downey Jr. Nathaniel Ayers, the musician, had been a student at Julliard when schizophrenia struck. The film presented his illness with sympathy and compassion. Incidentally I am reading The Caveman's Valentine which is fiction but features a schizophrenic black man who lives in a cave in a NYC park. The book: http://www.bookreview.com/$spindb.query.listreview2.booknew.2778 and the movie: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0182000/

PatH · « **Reply #461 on:** January 09, 2010, 04:56:38 PM »

Quote from: pedln on January 09, 2010, 12:29:52 PM

These Ellery Queen Mystery Magazines -- are they collectors' items now?

Last time I checked, they were worth about $1 each, so someone wants them, but they're not valuable.

JoanK · « **Reply #462 on:** January 09, 2010, 06:43:45 PM »

In Mystery Corner, we were just talking about what I think is one of the most successful transcription of books into movies: "The No. 1 Ladies Detective Agency". If you haven't seen the DVDs, I highly recommend them.

marjifay · « **Reply #463 on:** January 12, 2010, 09:40:47 AM »

Well we got to see Avatar yesterday at the IMAX in Camarillo. It was interesting (to a point). But we did need 3-D glasses which were given us as part of the $11.50 ticket price. The 3-D was great -- fantastic, in fact -- very much better than the tame 1950s 3-D. And the scenes of the jungle and exotic animals and birds on the other planet were gorgeous. But I'm just not that much a fan of fantasy/sci-fi books or movies, so the 2-1/2 hours seemed a bit too long. Lots of action, more than I cared for. But I'm glad I went - my curiosity was satisfied.

Marj

marjifay · « **Reply #464 on:** January 12, 2010, 09:51:04 AM »

Forgot to mention that the previews showed the next 3D movie at the IMAX will be ALICE IN WONDERLAND with (who else?) Johnniy Depp as the Mad Hatter. We just might go see that, as it looked very good. I just re-read the book recently for discussion in another group.

Marj

pedln · « **Reply #465 on:** January 12, 2010, 10:47:14 AM »

Marj, I think the special effects would be interesting, but I'm not a sci-fi fan either, and 2 1/2 hours would be a bit long. Especially if there were no captions, which I doubt there are.

Alice in Wonderland sounds good. I'd like to see that. My question would be, when the DVDs come (hopefully with captions or subtitles) can they only work on a 3D TV set or would you also get a pair of the glasses with the DVD. Somewhere, in one of the news colums they said that if you tried to watch a 3D production without the glasses (screen or TV) it would be a blurry mess.

marjifay · « **Reply #466 on:** January 12, 2010, 11:05:29 AM »

No, Pedln, there were no captions except a few here and there to decipher some of the dialogue of the people on the strange planet.
As to whether you can watch a 3D movie without the glasses -- I took my glasses off towards the end of the movie as my eyes were getting tired, and after a few moments I could see it just fine without any blurriness -- just no 3D effects. So I imagine you could see it on a regular TV screen, you just wouldn't have that effect. But it looked like a beutiful movie, and I don't think that would matter too much.

Marj

Babi · « **Reply #467 on:** January 13, 2010, 08:36:00 AM »

Hmmm. At 2-1/2 hours, MARJ, I'm glad I've put it on my Netflix list.
It may be a long while before I get it, but I can at least break up my
viewing session into smaller chunks.
I hadn't heard about Johnny Depp as the Mad Hatter. He would be in his
perfect metier for that one. Another one to add to my 'send it when you
have it list' at Netflix.
Another reason for Netflix, PEDLN. The theatres don't use closed
captioning, but nearly all the Netflix films do. I'm glad you asked that
question about blurred vision with 3-D on the TV. And very glad to read
Marj's answer.

pedln · « **Reply #468 on:** January 13, 2010, 10:27:57 AM »

Well, I just ordered seasons1 & 2 of The Waltons from Amazon -- rock bottom price for the 10 discs. But what an ordeal to get product info from them. (And half the stuff in my house is from Amazon.) E-mailing is just about impossible because any response says says that it comes from a "non-responsive" site. I wanted to know if the product had closed-captions. Finally after almost a week I received an email (non-responsive) that the product was shrink-wrapped and I should contact Warner Theatre. Oh sure.

Anyway, guess if they have CC or subtitles they'll certainly be a change from Desperate Housewives, which I'm received from Netflix, disc by disc.

Babi, I'll be curious to know how Avatar works on a TV, without glasses. A woman in my bridge foursome just saw it. Her opinion was similar to yours, Marj. She's not into sci-fi, but liked the special effects. Thought it was pretty long.

mrssherlock · « **Reply #469 on:** January 13, 2010, 12:22:39 PM »

Netflix sent me "Lost in Austen" and I couldn't turn the CC off! "Lost" is fun and I was really caught up in it until the disk got stuck. Maybe cleaning with a damp cloth will work; if not Netflix will send me another one when I send this one back.

pedln · « **Reply #470 on:** January 13, 2010, 08:24:47 PM »

Jackie, to turn off CC you go into your TV Memu settings and turn it off there. (Or, some lucky people have a little CC button on their remote, which is a tad easier) To turn off subtitles, you do that directly to the DVD, usually with your DVD remote. What gets confusing now, is that many of the newer DVDs don't have CC, but have SDH, which is "subtitles for the deaf and hard of hearing" and that (I think) comes from the DVD, and turning CC on or off on your TV wouldn't affect it. But, I'm not totally sure on that.

Babi · « **Reply #471 on:** January 14, 2010, 08:21:35 AM »

JACKIE, there are little velvety cloths made for the purpose of wiping off
CD's. I don't know whether wiping with a damp cloth is a good idea or
not. My daughter explained, too, that the wiping should be done gently from the center outward, not a circular motion. It's a good thing I have
her here with me. No telling what kind of damage I would do with all
the new tech.

PatH · « **Reply #472 on:** January 14, 2010, 10:15:10 AM »

The Netflix sleeves advise gentle washing with liquid soap or window cleaner. This has sometimes worked for me. I then rinse under a gentle stream of water. Babi's right about wiping from the center out.

Once I wanted to be sure that a badly defective DVD wasn't sent out again, so I put a sma piece of masking tape over the center hole, not touching any playing surface, with a note. I got back an email saying We believe you have tried to communicate with us, but it is not in a form that can be answered.

pedln · « **Reply #473 on:** January 14, 2010, 12:14:23 PM »

PatH

Sounds like their PR is okay. Not like some other places I know.

JoanK · « **Reply #474 on:** January 14, 2010, 02:56:07 PM »

I just got a letter from Netflix, inviting me to rejoin (I used to belong, and dropped it when I saw I wasn't using it). They offered me a service where instead of sending movies, they would stream them to my TV or computer -- any number of movies for $8.99/month.

Somehow, that doesn't appeal to me. I would feel I HAD to watch trhe movie in one sitting, but I almost always get interrupted.

Babi · « **Reply #475 on:** January 15, 2010, 08:42:08 AM »

I didn't know about the liquid soap or glass cleaner, PAT. Valerie
probably does, tho'. I generally leave the handling of the DVD's to her.
I think she also notifies Netflix when a disc is flawed. Apparently
there is a way to do that, perhaps at their website.

I don't much like the idea of movies being 'streamed' directly to my TV
either, JoanK. But I would still watch them at my leisure. One can always
'resume' at a later time.

pedln · « **Reply #476 on:** January 15, 2010, 09:49:09 PM »

Streaming or DVD -- the final product would be the same. I think. You could still stop in the middle of a streamed film, could you not? I've watched a few on my laptop and somehow Netflix remembers right where you left off. One disadvantage with streaming is that you don't have as large a selection, and for those of us who use captions, you won't find them on English language films. One on foreign films that have English subtitles. Netflix says they're working on this.

Streaming is no doubt the way of the future, but I'll stick with the DVDs until the entire collection is available, and the streaming can be done wirelessly without having to connect your TV to something else. Like right now, I can sit in a chair in my living room or on my front porch and watch one of those foreign films on my battery-run laptop. But I don't do it very often.

JimNT · « **Reply #477 on:** January 17, 2010, 10:40:30 AM »

I finally found a movie I saw several years ago and had confidently predicted it would win several awards. Lo and behold, I received the disc from Netfllix broken in half and must now await a replacement. In any event, I never heard about the movie again. So much for my ability to identify award winning movies. I've boldly made such predictions before and cannot remember a single success. I'm a slow learner.

Babi · « **Reply #478 on:** January 18, 2010, 08:31:09 AM »

Don't give it a thought, JIM. Critics often praise things I don't
like, and vice versa. We all have things that appeal to us
particularly. There are any number of books that won awards
in the past that few people today ever heard of.

mrssherlock · « **Reply #479 on:** January 18, 2010, 11:27:34 AM »

A new site to me is "Rotten Tomatoes", a movie review site. They have awards each year, the Golden Tomato, with a companion award, The Moldy Tomato. Here is the page for 2009 awards: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/guides/rtawards/

News:

Author Topic: Movies & Books Into Movies (Read 552278 times)