Heh heh snarky.

Gary Cooper’s so good.

This is very amusing indeed.

Yay! Edward Everett Horton! I should watch all movies he’s been in, really.

Oh it’s… it’s.. what’s his name? Yes, David Niven! I don’t really think of him as a 30s actor, but indeed:

He was 28 here, but basically looks the same as he looked when he was 60.

Wow, that’s odd looking. The four people in the foreground have been shot in front of a read projection of people cavorting at the beach. So that’s already weird, but also the depth of field is so strange. The projected people are slightly out of focus (which is natural), but everybody in front are abnormally super sharp even though there’s a couple meters between them — the guy behind Coop is 100% in focus, while the people “behind” him aren’t.

It’s just disturbing, and it’s not the first shot of the kind. Did they send a second crew to the Riviera to film stuff, and then shoot the rest in Hollywood on a sound stage? A very sandy sound stage?

Tu plaisantes !

Heh heh, that’s funny.

Oh, they didn’t name this movie randomly… but it’s so weird that they’d spoil the plot (sort of) by giving away the twist in the title? I guess?

This movie sort of goes off the rails after the first bit…

But it’s still very funny!

Yeah, Hazel Flagg’s right again. The good parts here really are perfect — Coop is doing an extremely good job here, and Claudette Colbert is so much fun, too. But the movie falls apart! The scene where he tries to get Colbert so drunk that he’ll get her to bed is super duper creepy, for instance. And the ending where Coop is in a straitjacket? It’s… I see what they were aiming for — screwball comedy — but it goes past that and into nightmare.

Sort of.

But the good bits are perfect.

Bluebeard’s 8th Wife. Ernst Lubitsch. 1938. ⚄

Noo! 16:9? Yeah, it was 1.85:1 originally… WHYYYY

16:9 sucks all the fun out of movies.

Wow, this is quite something else. It reminds me a bit of Hal Hartley movies made around the same time? Absurd but not quite.

OK, the plot here doesn’t make much sense. He apparently has $500K in art and stuff, but instead of selling some of that stuff off, he goes to his uncle and asks for a $50K loan… and if he doesn’t pay him back in six weeks, his uncle will take all those $500Ks worth of stuff.

That’s just… stupid. I mean, he’s supposed to be pretty dim, I guess, but even so.

But I mean it’s a good setup for a screwball comedy, I guess.

This is a very funny movie. It reminds me so much of the screwball comedies of the 30s, but updated. The twist is that the Mattheau character isn’t very sympathetic, but the audience is rooting for him to become one. Which is a pretty 30s plot, I guess?

Anyway, I loved this movie. It’s almost a ⚅, but not quite — the last half is perfect, but the first half is a bit clunky in setting everything up.

A New Leaf. Elaine May. 1971. ⚄

This DVD has the oddest aspect ratio problems I’ve ever encountered. It came up as something approaching 1.2:1, but it’s really a 1.37:1 film. (And it claimed that it was 1.5:1!) So to get it to stretch out to something that approaches normality, I had to tell mpv to play it as 16:9! It turns out that this DVD has been mastered with black borders at the sides! The borders are in the video file! I mean, I’ve seen that with black borders top/bottom (quite usual, “letterboxing”), but I’ve never seen a DVD with burned-in window boxing fit for a 16:9 TV. That’s just absurd. So they just waste a lot of horizontal data area for blackness.

Very strange — and it’s a brand new DVD, so perhaps they’ve fired everybody that knew how to master DVDs?

Movies used to have lighting.

Wow, that’s a young baby.

Ah right.

This is quite an intriguing movie. I really didn’t expect this to go where it did — and I guess a few years later, a movie like this would be pretty difficult to make?

That said, I wasn’t as gripped by this movie as it wanted me to be.

Dodsworth. William Wyler. 1936. ⚄