|
|
|
Comment |
Sorted by
Date Written |
Re: billyboy (Reply to this comment)
by macresarf1
Dear billyboy/vielledame: Thank you for your praise and comment.
Joel McCrae was of course the Title Character. He carries it wonderfully, as he often does in films. I can't imagine another actor of the time who combined a Charlie Sheen klutziness with the flair of a Cary Grant.
Regards.
[Macresarf1]
|
Apr 24 '01
11:39 am PDT
|
|
Re: Great God in Heaven... (Reply to this comment)
by macresarf1
Dear isinga: I think McCrae's problem was that he was so dependible in so many films, in so many genres, that he was easily overlooked in the good ones and given faint praise in the bad ones.
Thank you for the comment.
[Macresarf1]
|
Aug 17 '00
6:49 pm PDT
|
|
billyboy (Reply to this comment)
by vielledame
Macresarf1's review is, as usual, informative and perceptive. Sullivan's Travels is as good a comedy as has ever been put onto film. It's also Sturges' most personal. And he is the target of his own satire. He is the Sullivan/Gulliver whose travels all bring him back, most preposterous than ever, to Hollywood. Not only is Lake excellent, so is the under-over-looked guy who plays Sullivan--one of the top western stars, whose career in the saddle culminated in the splended Ride the High Country, was one of the finest of all screwball comedians.
|
Aug 14 '00
12:05 pm PDT
|
|
Great God in Heaven... (Reply to this comment)
by isinga
There are actually some others who like Sullivan's Travels! It was one of the few really good movies Joel McCrea ever made. He allowed himself to be cast in some films that were actually far below his abilities. This one, however, was of quality fit to stand alone as well as benefit from a well-cast Sullivan. Great review. Thanks.
isinga
|
Aug 11 '00
5:11 pm PDT
|
|
Re: decline? well. . . (Reply to this comment)
by macresarf1
Dear Steven Murray: I suppose the point I am trying to make, perhaps not successfully, is that Sturges, as Sullivan, spent years forming and completing THE TRIUMPH OVER PAIN. Paramount opposed it, recut it, and changed its title to THE GREAT MOMENT. Sturges says in Sturges on Sturges: "I was certain the picture would have a shameful and mediocre career in that form and with that title . . . that would do neither me nor the studio nor me any good."
After the film's failure at the box office -- I believe his first -- Paramount reduced Sturges' autonomy in the terms of his contract renewal. Although he completed THE MIRACLE OF MORGAN'S CREEK in the year of THE GREAT MOMENT'S release, he says, "Most of 1943 was spent writing and directing HAIL THE CONQUERING HERO and the rest of it in trying to save TRIUMPH OVER PAIN from some savage assaults in the cutting room."
He refused the new contract terms and left Paramount a month before the release of THE MIRACLE AT MORGAN'S CREEK.
I, too, love UNFAITHFULLY YOURS (and THE SIN OF HAROLD DIDDLEBOCK,for that matter) but these films, made for 20th Century and Howard Hughes, respectively, were financial disasters, and THE BEAUTIFUL BLONDE FROM BASHFUL BEND (the worst picture he ever did) made it three in a row -- and the virtual end of his career.
Thank you for making me think about this matter. Perhaps I'll go back and clarify my purpose a bit.
[Macresarf1]
|
Aug 06 '00
11:54 am PDT
|
|
decline? well. . . (Reply to this comment)
by Stephen_Murray,  in Movies
Did he make it after "The Lady Eve"? Personally, I think "Unfaithfully yours" is the best Sturges film, but sooner after "Sullivan" were the Americana comedies "Palm Beach Story", "Miracle of Morgan's Creek" and "Hail the conquering hero." The latter two seem pretty pointed to me. "Palm Beach Story" is frothier but not without covert social commentary.
|
Aug 05 '00
5:26 pm PDT
|
|
|
|
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.