Wednesday, October 2, 2002
|
Wednesday, October 2, 2002 |
|
My opinion on old movies, in black and white By MICHAEL BOYLAN Admit it, there was a time in your life when you looked at old family pictures, or watched an episode of "The Three Stooges" or "The Little Rascals" and thought that in "the olden days," life was in black and white. I remember thinking that and wondering what the transition from black and white to color must have been like. What a wonderful and amazing time it must have been. By looking at the pictures in the family photo album it looked like it was a gradual transition. As the people got more used to color, they experimented wildly with it using day glo and tie dye. Of course I soon found out that this theory was inaccurate when my mother showed me pictures of myself as a baby and they were in black and white. The horror! I was then told that the grass had always been green, the sky had always been blue and there had always been rainbows. This made sense and since then I have not really thought much about black and white, except when I'd flip by Nick at Nite or an old movie. Which brings me to the real topic at hand - old movies. I'm not so sure that they are as good as everybody thinks they are. Sure, there are some classics like "Casablanca," "Citizen Kane" and "Psycho" but I feel like some people instantly dub black and white movies classics and that upon a second viewing or a critical viewing, they aren't all that great. Take Alfred Hitchcock's "Spellbound" for instance, since that is the one I just watched and the one that got me going about old movies. I enjoyed the film after the first half hour or so but I wouldn't consider it a "classic" nor would I place it among Hitchcock's best. In my opinion, "Spellbound" suffers from what many old movies suffer from: monotone, rapid dialogue, too much sweepy, weepy music and implausible situations. First, the montone rapid dialogue. Take almost any old movie and dialogue sounds something like this. Guy 1: (speaking quickly) Say, whaddya think yer doing here anyway? Guy 2: What's it to ya bub? Maybe you should mind your own business, see? Guy 1: I'll mind my own business when I'm good and ready and nobody is going to stop me, see? What's with all the "sees?" In the beginning of "Spellbound" there are about six doctors all speaking very quickly and wittily but you can't distinguish their voices apart. Never mind the fact that they aren't saying anything that interesting. It didn't feel like watching acting, it felt more like watching recitation. The funniest part of the movie came at the part of the film where Gregory Peck's character takes Ingrid Bergman's character on a hike and picnic. Peck asks her which sandwich she would like, ham or liverwurst. The sweepy, weepy music swells, the camera goes to a closeup of Bergman's moon-eyed face and she whispers, gushingly, "Liverwurst." Wow. Is liverwurst supposed to symbolize something? Maybe that's how guys picked up women in the olden days. A good liverwurst sandwich and you might see some ankle. For an audience that's used to Mystery Science Theater 3000, something like that liverwurst line could throw an entire movie off. Thankfully, Hitchcock was a great director and the story picked up and got more interesting. Did we really need all the music though? I understand that movies need a score and that the score accentuates the suspense of the movie but did "Spellbound" really require an overture before the film started. It wasn't a musical, after all. Lastly, the implausible situations. There is a scene where Peck and Bergman, on the lam from the police, go to visit an old doctor friend of Bergman's. As they get to the house, the housekeeper says that he is out but that they can go in and wait for him. She also says that there are two other men waiting for him inside before she leaves. Now, what kind of a housekeeper lets four people into the house of her boss and just leaves? She's not keeping the house very well. I understand letting Bergman in but leaving two other people in the house unattended? I guess it was a different time back then, a simpler time. Movies didn't cost millions of dollars and audiences knew that they could expect wholesome entertainment that was suitable for the whole family. However, measured against today's movie standards, old movies look and sound kind of hokey. Still, I suppose a decent Hitchcock film is better than anything that has Courtney Love, Corey Haim or Dolph Lundgren in a sizable role. I'm off to the deli to pick up some liverwurst and try to spice up my marriage.
|
