The Big Combo

Man, this looks great.

Very noir indeed.

I could only find this on bluray in a Portuguese edition. I mean, it has the original English audio, so it doesn’t matter, but it’s pretty weird, eh? Because this edition has been restored really well — except that it’s in 16:9! But whyyy

Man, they’re using lenses with a low f in this movie. The focus puller works really hard in some scenes. And in some scenes, like this, only one person is in focus even if they’re standing pretty close to each other.

It’s a pretty weird choice, but it looks really dramatic.

Very dramatic! This bluray is in 16:9, though, which means that they’ve probably chopped… something. What was this originally? Er… Oh, it was 1.85:1? OK, they’ve chopped bits from the left and right?

Man, that’s some torture.

That’s some excellent henchman work!

I have to admit that I don’t quite follow the plot of this movie, but I like each individual scene. The cinematography is wonderful (when the focus puller manages to keep up), and the performances are so noir…

I want one of those closets!

The Big Combo. Joseph H. Lewis. 1955. ⚂

Stay Hungry

I don’t think I’ve seen this movie before? But the name does sound awfully familiar. Perhaps I’ve read the Mad Magazine version?

Heh heh, parking on the top of a building so that you can have a shot of the streets below without filming on the streets. Hm… the director is Bob Rafelson…

Oh oh oh — Five Easy Pieces and The Postman Always Rings Twice. I’ve seen those.

And also Head, the Monkees movie.

It’s not a very… extensive career, though?

Yes, this is another Hazel Flagg movie.

Is that Freddie Kruger?

IT IS!

Yes, it’s Arnold. I think this movie is mostly mentioned as “and then Arnold tried to do a serious movie”.

It seems like the critical reaction was very positive, and it apparently did well at the box office? But modern audience ratings are pretty negative…

The plot here is so classic that I kinda understand why this is a film that’s been rather forgotten: It’s about a hoiti toity capitalist that’s going to do nefarious things with a couple of city blocks, but there’s one business that refuses to sell! So he goes in and becomes rather enamoured with the people he should be swindling. So… is he going to betray them or not!?!?

I mean, there’s a reason this plot is so popular — I’ve seen at least a couple dozen movies that are variations on this plot — but you have to do something more with it to not just seem… plodding.

And this film almost does that, but then it tips over into ridiculousness.

Can’t fault the wig people.

It’s such a weird movie. It’s mostly a drama, but then it takes these detours into Benny Hill territory. But without any actual jokes that make sense.

The movie does have a certain jenneseqoia — but it’s just a hard sell. It mixes broad farce with drama and ends up not making much sense. If I had a dollar for every scene where I went “wait what?” I’d be able to buy a pretty fancy burger.

But it’s pretty likeable.

Stay Hungry. Bob Rafelson. 1976. ⚂

Hold Your Man

Heh heh.

Yes, it’s another movie from the Hazel Flagg collection.

Tough gal.

I wouldn’t have recognised Clark Gable. The stache makes the man or something.

The date’s going well.

Harlow is really going for a Mae West kind of thing here, isn’t she? Did she usually do that? She’s doing it very well, but it kinda makes you go “this would have been funnier with Mae West”…

But I mean, it’s still funny.

Right on.

Suddenly it’s one of those Women In Prison movies!

Yeah, Hazel Flagg was right about this one — the first half was very amusing indeed, but now it’s all moralising and stuff. I mean, it’s not all bad — there’s still a couple of gags here and there, but it’s mostly snoresville.

Awww.

There were good bits in the last half of the movie, but it didn’t really work as a whole, I think.

Hold Your Man. Sam Wood. 1933. ⚂