dirac

Yes, the list of her stage performances does look far from complete. It marches on too quickly. Somehow I didn't think of her as being eighty.

Another obituary, alas, this one for Anna Moffo, age 73. I did not see her live, although I have a recording of her in Lucia and it’s one of my favorites.

Stapleton’s bio (click on link to the left for filmography): Stage roles: Quite a career.

canbelto writes: The only exception I can think of is Olga Spessivtseva, who from pictures at least looked very long, leggy, and tall, especially compared to other ballerinas of her time. Didn't Martine van Hamel dance Giselle as well as Myrtha? Did anyone see her?

Thanks, miliosr. I saw it not too long ago on cable, where it does show up from time to time, and although I must respectfully disagree and say that the picture as a whole isn’t so great, there are some good things in it. Specifically, I thought the account of the illicit affair was interesting. Ontkean is a happily married doctor who realizes that all is not well when Harry Hamlin shows up at his clinic for a checkup. The two go out to lunch and complications ensue. Once their affair begins, Ontkean imprints on Hamlin as a duckling does its mother, and the only thing he wants to do is reconstruct his life just the way it was – only with a man and not a woman. The year being 1980, however, Hamlin has other fish to fry and zero interest in settling down with anybody. I thought the resolution of this dilemma and some of the exchanges between Ontkean and Hamlin were well handled. Hamlin has said that he thought the failure of the movie sabotaged his career in feature films.

Ed Waffle writes: Yes, and I thought it was a bit much, although Randy Quaid was very good. After all, the man has a point, even if he isn’t very nice. Ennis is indeed far more provincial than Jack, although I’d suggest that at the beginning of the story, he, like Jack, has his plans for the future, although there’s a suggestion in both the story and film that these plans aren’t terribly serious. In addition, one reason that Ennis doesn’t stay with his jobs is that he’s taking too much time off to be with Jack, as Ennis notes when he tells Jack that he can’t just quit a job and find another as he used to when he was younger. Following what canbelto said, as a working man, he has less autonomy. Anthony_NYC writes: I agree. I think the time and care put into establishing Jack and Ennis’ affair in its early stages is justified. Maybe there are a few too many shots of the sheep, but these kids don’t understand what is happening to them and nothing’s going to happen fast. It also sets up the rest of the film: paradise lost (I think this is part of what bothers people who say the affair is too idealized – they’re partly correct, IMO, but only partly) and there’s a foreshadowing hint of Et in Arcadia ego. Addressing GWTW's sense of disappointment -- I can understand why some viewers feel that way. This is a romance in a sense, yes, but it's one where the true story lies in choices not made, things not said, roads not taken -- thwarted lives. So if you were going into the movie with an expectation of seeing a Great Love Story -- which was indeed what the marketing campaign prepared you for -- that was not what you were going to get.

A great actor of stage and screen, Maureen Stapleton,has died age 80.

Yes, there’s nothing like an orderly, well managed harem. Flippancy aside, I agree there has to be balance. It should be noted that ballet discipline didn’t invent the eating disorder, but by the same token discussion of such problems shouldn’t be viewed as an attack on ballet, although some critics regrettably take that approach. I certainly wouldn’t want to take the view that such problems can’t be addressed and ameliorated.

Returning this post of Paul Parish's to this thread:

Thank you for posting, Paul. It may be a bit odd to bring Norman Mailer into this particular discussion, but in his book about Marilyn Monroe he talks about what went wrong in her marriage with Joe DiMaggio, and he remarks of the latter that for men like him, “the times of their lives are spent with men,” not women, and Mailer adds that this is not necessarily “homosexual, but fundamental.” Centuries ago the love between two men, not necessarily a sexual love, it could take various forms, was considered the highest form of affection. I can’t say that I’d want to return to that situation, as I think the low status of women had something to do with it, but it’s worth recollecting from time to time. I did think of it as I was watching, and reading, “Brokeback,” because I wondered if the love between Jack and Ennis has a different intensity because of their sex; I had the sense that neither man would be able to love a woman in quite the same way even if their orientation had been different. Thanks for the link, Anthony _NYC. In all candor, I can’t really comment on “Crash” without being impolite, and so I’m going to leave the specifics alone, although I would like to say that I appreciate Helene’s speaking up and if other supporters of the film would like to, they are most welcome and I promise not to say anything unless I lose all control. My own general feeling is that picture isn’t an atrocity by any means, there are some good scenes, and in a weaker year for movies like last Oscar season it probably wouldn’t have looked that bad. I rented it recently and it looks much better on the smaller screen. I think it would have been a good made for cable picture.

Very well said, Hans, indeed.

Yes. Ennis does not expect to be happy, and he does not try for it (“If you can’t fix it, you gotta stand it”). Jack (and Alma) wriggle around looking for a way out. She finds one and he doesn’t, because she’s tied to Ennis legally, not emotionally -- and she is able to find a man who will be the good provider that Ennis won’t and can’t be. Yes, again -- some are treating it as if it were a “message movie” and that’s the last thing it is.

Paul Parish posted this on the Awards season thread. I thought it might be better placed here. Thanks, Paul.

I hope the roll keeps rolling -- reports from Helene, or anyone else?

I’m short of time again today, but in brief, I would recommend seeing Brokeback again. It repays a second viewing, and more than most films I suspect it will lose a lot on DVD. Even if you have a widescreen state of the art television, which I don’t, the wide vistas and desolate landscapes won’t have the same effect on the small screen. It is very intense, though. I was okay through my previous tipping point, when Ennis finds the shirt, but this time the killer was the very last scene, with Ennis in his trailer, fingering his little relics. ( To those who haven’t seen the movie yet, this may sound like ruthless milking of the emotions, but it really isn’t like that; it's more of a simple statement of longing and loss.) It was also worth a second look because my friend, like me at one time a skeptic alienated by the tub-thumping, came to mock and stayed to snuffle.

canbelto wrote: You were right, I was wrong. Alas. Thanks for the gloss on Clooney's comments, carbro.

Good to hear from you, Ed. Thanks to everyone for the illuminating posts!

kfw writes: I don't think so.

Well, we have to talk more about Brokeback, as I’m taking a friend to see it tonight and will report back on what, if anything, a second viewing reveals. [insert 'Brokeback, I just can't quit you' joke here.] Not much time to post for the rest of the day, but I thought that Munich had the faults of its virtues, so to speak. It has the structure of a thriller, but the story it tells is knotty and ambiguous, a story about which the storytellers themselves are deeply ambivalent. Ambivalence doesn’t make for a rousing thriller, or a satisfying political melodrama. Instead, the audience is left at loose ends, like Avner (the leading character, played by Eric Bana). I thought that was intentional. No, you don’t come away with a message, but are you supposed to? Spielberg is a master at pushing your buttons (“Laugh!” “Cry!” “Scream!” “Cheer!”) and this time he holds back --as he did once before, for the fascinating failure “A.I.” More later. Anyone else?

Anthony_ NYC writes: Uh-huh. The year they achieve a broadcast in perfect taste, and without gratuitous displays of self congratulation and naked self regard, is the year I stop watching. Even Clooney succumbed -- did I misunderstand him, or did he actually credit Hattie McDaniel's Oscar as a fearless blow against racism??? Update: Gee, Roger Ebert is getting really upset. You'd think his picture lost.

He tries so hard. And it’s terrible, because there is a form of happiness waiting for him and he doesn’t – can’t – reach for it. I wasn’t thinking so much of Ennis the character, though, as the way the wives are depicted in the film. As I said somewhere earlier, there did seem to be an anxiety that we might stop sympathizing with Ennis and Jack, however briefly, and so the wives are made more unappealing and whiny than I thought was absolutely necessary. (If this was an Elia Kazan production from 1956, they’d have cast Shelley Winters as Alma.) It seems to me, however, that you don’t have to choose sides. The point is that everyone suffers. Jack and Ennis are in the foreground, and as Quiggin notes, that's where they belong -- it is their story. Interesting that you should choose the ocean liner/canoe metaphor, Quiggin – I read an interview with Annie Proulx where she used it, too. Yes, Ledger gets better and better as the story progresses (Gyllenhaal doesn’t age convincingly). I've done Ledger an injustice in the past -- I used to think he was just a blond hunk with a great voice. Lightly filled in, yes, but another one of the impressive things about the adaptation was how little McMurtry and Ossana had to invent. I agree with you about The Last Picture Show connection. Proulx works in a lot of detail without making a big show of it. I have to go read the story again. Thanks for the comments, people. Keep them coming. canbelto?

kfw, thanks for reviving this discussion. Exactly. I wouldn’t feel too charitable about Jack, either, if I were Alma. As far as she’s concerned, Jack is bad news, the guy who took away her husband. Of course, Ennis can’t acknowledge his own pain, either – but that means he clamps down not only on his own emotions but everyone else’s, too. Hmmm. Interesting. I didn’t put that interpretation on it, but it’s possible. Proulx doesn’t suggest it, as I recall. I took the mean father-in-law scenes as another way of drumming up sympathy for Jack – her father treats Jack like dirt, and does Lureen support her husband? In the short story, Proulx indicates that Jack and his father-in-law don’t get on, but I think she leaves it at that. (I think there is a kind of set up for Jack’s murder, though – that little scene early on where Jack puts the moves on the rodeo clown, not realizing that he might as well be telegraphing his proclivities to the entire bar.) Another important lacuna, it seemed to me, is that we don’t find out enough about Lureen, and it makes Hathaway’s final scene on the telephone with Ledger opaque – what did she know and when, if she knew, did she know it? Hathaway starts off very strong and vivid, but I thought the script let her down a bit, although it’s in most respects a remarkable piece of adaptation.

How to spice up some famous literary endings. Ben Macintyre has a few suggestions in The Times. To cuddle a mockingbird

Hard to say. Being the front runner hasn’t necessarily hurt past favorites. There were people muttering that it was overrated and they were sick of hearing about it, but I’m not sure that alone would keep it from winning. (I actually had the reverse reaction – I went to see “Brokeback” all prepared to say how overrated it was, and came out thinking, That was really good.) I very much liked Reese Witherspoon’s acceptance speech, but then I very much like Reese. Nice dress, too. Ryan Phillippe had a fixed tight smile, as if he were fearful lest Witherspoon do a Hilary Swank and forget to thank him. (Eventually, she did mention “my husband.”)

Well, white folks were hugging their Hispanic servants all over Brentwood last night. There have been frequent occasions when I’ve disagreed with the Best Picture choices, but this year I think the Academy actually chose the worst of the nominated films (which were all, except for the winner, very respectable choices). It’s a shame, though, because Brokeback Mountain, although not perfect, would have been a genuinely distinguished choice, a departure from recent Academy custom. In other words, they blew it. True. There’s been a lot of commentary on the fact that Oscar gowns have been very “conservative,” e.g., “boring” in recent years, in large part because the women stars are fearful – justifiably, IMO – of being laughed at for wearing anything daring. Although I miss the flamboyant bad taste of the heyday of Bob Mackie and Nolan Miller, I also think that the rise of the simple sheath is progress of a kind – women’s evening wear is becoming more of a uniform style, with minor variations, as it’s been for men all along. Speaking of the men, I could have done without Larry McMurtry’s blue jeans, although I did appreciate that he worked in a plug for booksellers, and Morgan Freeman appeared to have wrapped his tie around his neck. J.Lo. was the only person who looked really awful – it was not only the color of the dress, as carbro notes, but what on earth was going on with her makeup????? That man never puts a foot wrong. He was smart and gracious for the red carpet interviews, and I understand he’s really cool about things like signing autographs, too. I’m beginning to hate him. I thought he was awarded in the wrong category for a couple of reasons. A) although he has charm and charisma to burn, he really isn’t the world’s greatest actor, not that it matters, and B) the Best Supporting category should be primarily for supporting actors, not stars who are graciously taking second leads or who’ve been put in the category so they don’t compete with another star in the same picture. I used to like him until after that odd episode when he singled out Bill Murray in the audience after Murray lost to Sean Penn a couple of years ago. It was obvious that he was so jealous of Murray that he could hardly speak. I missed Catherine Zeta-Jones and her I Am a Movie Star, Isn’t It Wonderful aura. It was hideous, wasn’t it? However, the Bad Taste high – or low – point of the evening for me was the “In the Deep” production number, which was some kind of interpretive dance involving car crashes. It looked like “Night of the Living Dead.” Unspoken thought from Steven Spielberg: “Well, at least I didn’t lose Best Director to Paul Haggis.”