Out of the Past (1947) by the Numbers

Repeat viewings of Out of the Past (1947) have been part of my movie watching repertoire for years. It all started when I was an undergrad in college and decided it would be fun to watch movies for homework! So I took a film class. The Quiet Man (1952) almost made me turn my back on classic films forever when Out of the Past saved me. When I watched it, I was both captivated and confused. I swooned in the same way I do when in the presence of a highly charistmatic man. I was hypnotized. Repeat viewings have increased by love and adoration for the film. I've seen it in for homework and for fun. I've seen it alone and with other people. I've seen it at home and recently got an opportunity to watch it on the big screen for the first time at the Brattle theater with several Out of the Past virgins. That seminal film encouraged me to pursue my interest in classic films, to nurture a love for the past and to start this little blog, my little haven on this vast web that is the internet.

What I discovered about Out of the Past when I last viewed it on the big screen, was how many wonderful small details enrich the film. I thought it would be fun to do a project of listing some of these details by the numbers. It was quite an intense process and it was difficult to be so thorough, but I'm pleased with the results. Enjoy!

• 10 alcoholic beverages not paid for
• 2 manly chin dimples
• 36 cigarettes
• 9 matches lit
• 11 lighters lit
• 12 outfits worn by Jane Greer

• 6 dead bodies
• 2 slaps and several punches
• 5 instances of women being man-handled
• 10 beautiful metaphors
• 4 shots with the Golden Gate bridge in the background
• 6 scenes with Kirk Douglas and Robert Mitchum together (alone)
• 2 fishing rods
• 1 shot glass thrown into the fire
• 11 kisses
• 4 trenchcoats
• 6 times in which the word "cute" is used
• 131 lbs. - the weight of Eunice Leonard and the suitcases of Kathy Moffat
• 1 mean river

I'm sure I'm off by a couple of cigarettes, a slap and maybe a trenchcoat, but there you have it!

~Vaya Con Dios~ Ricardo Montalban (1920-2009)

Thank you Ricardo Montalban for representing Latinos in an industry which often overlooks us.

~Descanse en pas. Vaya con Dios. Gracias por las imagenes y las memorias.~

Ginger's Review ~ Beyond a Reasonable Doubt (1956)

Go check out Ginger's review of the Fritz Lang noir Beyond a Reasonable Doubt (1956) (starring Dana Andrews of course) over at Steve-O's blog Noir of the Week. Yes I know, I'm a blogger, recommending you read another blogger's post on another blogger's blog. But hey this is my blog, I can do what I want.

Ginger's review is straightforward and ultimately reaches out and smacks you in the face. She doesn't like the film and she's not afraid to tell you that. However, after reading the review you may still want to watch the film anyways just because of all the fun stuff she points out. Cheesy come-ons, burlesque clubs and strippers circa 1956? Sign me up!

Here is the linky love:

Ginger's Blog ~ Asleep in New York

Steve-O's Blog ~ Noir of the Week

Ginger's Review ~ Beyond a Reasonable Doubt (1956)

Good Heavens: All This, and Heaven Too (1940)

All This, and Heaven Too (1940) is a Warner Bros. period epic starring Bette Davis and Charles Boyer. It was directed by Anatole Litvak, whom Bette Davis was both rumored to have clashed with professionally and had a romantic affair with. And according to Robert Osborne, studio execs felt that in this stage of Bette Davis' career, she had enough star power to carry a movie as the sole major star. This film is a departure fromt that with that as Charles Boyer, at the height of his fame, sharing top billing with the great Bette Davis.

The story is based on the Rachel Field novel. It's a fictionalized account of the true story of Henriette Deluzy Deportes (Davis), an English governess who finds work in the home of the French Duc de Praslin (Boyer). Deportes falls in love with the children she cares for as well as their father, provoking the ire of the Praslin's insanely jealous and demented wife, the Duchess de Praslin (Barbara O'Neil). Fans of Virginia Weidler will be happy to see her in this film playing one of the Praslin children.

The film was expensive and lavish with lots of period costumes and grand sets. All that money couldn't ensure a hit, and this film went on to have lukewarm reviews and did poorly at the box office. I can't say I'm surprised as I did not enjoy this film that much. For one, I have a tendency to shy away from classic period films. Studios back in the day took period dramatics too seriously. What we end up with is a lot of grandiose films that have the potential to overwhelm and bore instead of awe. For me personally, it was far too long (140 minutes) and every scene was dripping with seriousness. There needed to be some lighter elements, such as happy scenes with the children, to let the pace of the movie move forward more smoothly rather than dragging on which it did. I also wished they had tempered the characters a bit. More subtlety and less dramatics. Barbara O'Neil's performance, although nominated for an Oscar, felt over-the-top in the worst way possible. I found myself laughing at some of her scenes, which was definitely not what the filmmakers intended as a suitable audience response.

Writing about this film was quite painful. I delayed it as long as I could. I do not like to write about films I don't enjoy because I try to find merit in everything I view. But I can't be pleased with everything can I?!