Manuel's comments (member since May 09, 2008)

Manuel's comments from the Movies We've Just Watched group.

I think we are all on the same boat regarding Schindler. It was too obvious to miss, being only a few years old.

I've never seen Shoah, but I've heard it is well worth watching.

The most unusual holocaust film I've ever seen was from Argentina. Done entirely in Spanish, it retells the holocaust experience of a Polish/Jewish man who eventually settled in Argentina after the war.

As a native Spanish speaker myself, I found it unnerving to hear Nazis and victims speaking Spanish.

The first time I ever read a book about the holocaust, I was a sophomore in high school. It was called "The Holocaust Kingdom" about a Polish/Jewish family who got caught in the nightmare. I had dreams about it for years.

I also seem to remember an incredible German film called "Europa Europa" the true story about a Jewish teenager (I dont remember if he is Polish or German) who passes as Aryan and gets drafted by the Germans and then later by the Russians. There is an unforgettable scene where the teenager is desperately trying to conceal his circumcision before Nazi doctors.

I think Holocaust films have a purpose and a place. I remember being in high school when the TV series "The Holocaust" first came out. Yes I had read about it in books and we studied it in class, but seeing on the screen made it more frightening.

"The Winds of War" was a TV mini series dealing more with the whole scope of WWII, but they did a great job dealing with the Holocaust within the context of one American family who's relatives get caught in it.

it goes back and forth. Life spills into our movies and certainly movies spill into our lives. Why else would we be reading this thread?

I too am curious about the movie version of "The Road".

I loved the book and I look forward to see how it was interpreted on film. Supposedly the mother has more of a presence in the movie than she did in the book.


Until I started reading this thread, I had never heard of The White Ribbon. Very curious about it too.

I remember reading somewhere how Mel Gibson was going to remake Fahrenheit 451. I wasnt crazy about the 60's version, but I always felt it deserved a decent movie treatment.

I liked this film a lot when I was in middle school. However Im reluctant to ever watch it again.

I suspect now that Im older, I wouldnt have the patience to overlook certain plotholes in the narrative or the overall message. Much like the guilty pleasure of a meal in a fast food restaurant, I want to enjoy the burger and fries without looking at the calorie count and worring about cholestoral. I would rather keep my happy memories of a small town hero fighting against the bad guys.

Somehow I feel cheated as a child because I never got into "Where the Wild Things Are".

Everyone has such wonderful associations with it.
Alex, I loved your input on this entire thread.

Im curious, now I'll have to read the piece by Rushdie

Wow
this thread has taken on an interesting twist.

I remember seeing" The Exorcist " while consuming mass quantities in the dorm rooms. I didnt know it was a comedy.

You should try to synch up THE WIZARD OF OZ with Pink Floyd's THE DARK SIDE OF THE MOON.

Dont hit play on the CD until you see the MGM lion roaring during the credits.

You will be surprised at how closely the songs are paralleling the images in the movie.

Perhaps I should see it again?
When I saw it in 1984, I was still in college and I had heard so much hype about it from my buddies. I was looking forward to seeing it and when I finally did, I was a bit underwhelmed.
The jokes and the satire seemed overly familiar and tired. I suspect it was my crowd's fault and not so much the movie.

The girl's mother has a lot to answer for, but I agree 100% with Alex's above statement.

Not the best example of a parent showing good judgment, by leaving your kid alone with a stranger. But the ultimate responsibility in this case was with Polanski.

If memory serves; the mother only found out about it, when she overheard the daughter telling her boyfriend about it on the telephone.

I dont give a damn if the
"victim" has forgiven him!!!

This was a crime against a 13 year old child and against the people and laws of California. This perpetrator may be a very gifted individual, but he has yet to be punished for a crime he has PLEAD GUILTY to have committed.

I cant understand the people who insist this should be forgotten.

A crime was committed, and no one has yet to be punished. I dont care how much time has already gone by and I dont care Polanski is in his 70's.

he was in his 40's when he did it, and she was 13 YEARS OLD!!!!!!!Yes she has moved on, and Im glad she got a settlement out of it, but she doesnt get to decide his fate.

I love the scene where a very bored Susan is oblivious to her home of a palace. She amuses herself by sitting in front of a huge fireplace and working on a simple jigsaw puzzle. Its not a very long scene, but Wells uses it to show us how empty this woman's life has become.

Some good insights into Mrs Kane's motivation Elaine.

I suspect you are right, she has probably had a hard life and she now sees an opportunity for her son to enter a world of opportunities she could never give him.
She is probably wise enough to realize that a clean break will enable young Kane to enter this world as an equal among his new peers.

has anyone ever seen the Simpson's version of Citizen Kane?

I agree about shipping affluent kids off to boarding school as the norm of the era. What I find so sad is the mother's virtual abdication of young Kane's care to this cold banker.

If SHE inherited the money, and if she indeed rules the roost; wouldn't it have made more sense to keep the kid and banish the husband? or better yet. Abandon the husband and make a home for herself and young Kane in the East?.........But then it wouldn't have made for a great movie, would it?

Thanks Tom.
You actually filled in some of the gaps in my memory about the scene. I had forgotten about the boarder as well as her line to her husband about the thrashing.

Nevertheless, it seems unusually harsh to leave her beloved son, with basically a total stranger. You are right, young Kane seems to love both his parents and is not happy about leaving them. Perhaps its Wells' way of establishing Kane's overwhelming loneliness as he is dying alone among strangers and he is remembering his early abandonment?

Can someone clear up the start of the movie for me?

We see a young Kane playing with his sled and a distraught woman played by Agnes Moorehead, who is clearly his mother. She seems to be much more powerful than the father figure in the scene.

What I dont understand is why she is sending the boy away? Supposedly this is the last time they will ever see their son again. We later learn that they are not poor, in fact they have just made a fortune through mining. In the scene in question, she, the father and a man in a business suit are discussing they boy.

Being poor I might understand why they may never see him again, but this is not the case. She clearly loves her son, yet she is abdicating all decisions regarding her son to this cold banker in a business suit. My point is that logically, they would have had plenty of opportunities to visit and be visited by their son. In the scene, she seems to already know they will never see him again.