| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
quade
Cougar
Joined: 12 Jun 2009
Posts: 74
Location: South of the 605
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 5:30 pm Post subject: A Face in the Crowd (1957) |
 |
|
I'm thinking "Whydunit" but am open to other points of view.
What do you think?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
quade
Cougar
Joined: 12 Jun 2009
Posts: 74
Location: South of the 605
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 12:03 pm Post subject: A week later. |
|
|
This post has been up for a week and has seven views and zero replies.
What I find interesting is that might mean a few of things;
1) People have nothing to say.
2) People haven't seen the film.
3) People don't care about films from this period.
This is usually a pretty active group when it come to analysis, so I'm almost going to have to toss out #1. I find it difficult to believe that people wouldn't be interested just because of the age of the film. I can't believe a person can be in the business of screenwriting without having studied say, On the Waterfront, which is by the same creative team and a few years earlier. I'll also give the group a lot of credit for not talking about things they haven't seen, so is that it?
Have people here just not seen this film?
It's an absolutely brilliant piece of screenwriting.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Lemoine
Tiger
Joined: 13 Mar 2009
Posts: 142
Location: So. Cal
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Haven't seen it, but your passion has compelled me to check it out. Thanks for the suggestion.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Martin Blank
Liger
Joined: 06 Nov 2007
Posts: 644
Location: Washington, D.C.
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 04, 2009 8:03 pm Post subject: Re: A week later. |
|
|
| quade wrote: | What I find interesting is that might mean a few of things;
1) People have nothing to say.
2) People haven't seen the film.
3) People don't care about films from this period. |
I have seen it...a REALLY long time ago. I’m remembering Andy Griffith and somehow Walter Matthau??? I have seen On the Waterfront at least a dozen times. I care about film from, well, the start of movies. I have worked my way through (via Netflix) thousands of films starting with silent movies. If you have not read it -- you might enjoy Kazan’s autobiography A Life.
Cheers,
Martin
_________________
"I killed the president of Paraguay with a fork."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
agentoinge
Cub
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Posts: 5
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 7:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Why were you thinking Whydunit?
I think its more of a fool triumphant -
1. Fool is Rhodes, Insider who knows all too well there's something there is Marcia who literally comes in to pluck him out of the crowd in jail and who 'gets it' that he has magical powers, Mel Miller is definitely the 'jealous insider' who gets the karmic backlash from trying to compete with the fool
2. Establishment - small town at first and then being 'sent off' to Nashville and his whole popularity comes from the fireworks of the mismatch with sponsors and radio establishmet and then in the 3rd act the establishment is the people he swore he was one of, he's now changed with power and against them without their best interests in mind anymore
3. Transmutation to 'Lonesome Rhodes' (even a fool assumes a new name moment)
And in the book under FT Blake talks about most of these stories being of "Country Mouse goes to the City' variety which this of course fits.
What a great film, one of my favorites.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
quade
Cougar
Joined: 12 Jun 2009
Posts: 74
Location: South of the 605
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 1:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| agentoinge wrote: | | Why were you thinking Whydunit? |
I was thinking that we, through the eyes of Marsha, peel back the layers of Lonesome's personality.
Blake says that the key in a Whydunit is turning over cards and if anybody has ever had a lot of cards and layers, it's Lonesome Rhodes.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
agentoinge
Cub
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Posts: 5
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 3:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| quade wrote: | | agentoinge wrote: | | Why were you thinking Whydunit? |
I was thinking that we, through the eyes of Marsha, peel back the layers of Lonesome's personality.
Blake says that the key in a Whydunit is turning over cards and if anybody has ever had a lot of cards and layers, it's Lonesome Rhodes. |
Ah, I see the 'dark turn' but who would qualify as the detective (Marsha does change so cant be her, maybe Mathau)?
And what would you consider the dark secret?
He does have a lot of layers but I dont know, I think the whydunit version of this is Citizen Kane. We just had to know what that sled meant and who Kane was, this towering figure and mystery behind him. Face in the crowd feels more like a character study than a slow reveal through cards turning over.
I think if I wasnt so tired I might have something to say about how it also could kind of go the institutionalized or MITH routes.
Give me more thoughts on the whydunit point of view though.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
