The Talented Mr. Ripley.
Thank you, that makes sense.Nice images! Rope is a classic Alfred Hitchcock film, and I think I last saw it when I taught a film class on the cinema of Hitchcock in collaboration with my film professor colleague and good friend Roger Bullis, here at the university.
However, I think the tie is a simple twill weave, sinilar to the one you see on trousers. Pindots would be very small dots, usually white against a solid background. Here's an example of a pindot fabric:
View attachment 52845
This is a twill weave (if you enlarge it, you will see the clear diagonal weave):
View attachment 52846
You're most welcome.Thank you, that makes sense.
It's very neat and impressive that you taught film.
You are so right...Thank you for your kind words. I have taught film classes in addition to psychology/neuroscience at my university, so one picks up a certain amount of information doing that.
I saw Midnight Cowboy a long time ago. I had heard of Salt at that time, but did not know his life too had been affected by the blacklist. So much craziness, and for what? Human beings can be so deeply flawed, and can can also be fooled into going along with every type of lunacy. As we can see, that hasn't changed much in the ensuing years! Oh well.
You've touched upon something very important." Yes, it was a good movie, although some critics did not feel that the ramifications of the paranoid style of politics during that time in our nation's history was treated effectively in the film."
For the most part it was a typical WA movie. A local guy from the neighborhood trying to be a "Macher"; a Yiddish term meaning the Boss or someone with power and influence. WA's character gets involved with a women, gets in over his head with his scheme and ultimately someone else pays a large price.
I thought it was a lightweight movie until the end credits. WA made sure to use as many blacklisted movie industry workers as possible. Each name is credited along with their association to HUAC investigations. That touch put everything into perspective, and made you realize that what you saw was not the plight of a few people, but what happened across the country.
Agreed. It's a fun movie and visually beautiful. My comments on it here #400 (but please feel free to ignore as we all have a lot going one).Just watched The Talented Mr Ripley again today -- I last saw it in a movie theatre when it came out in 1999/2000. A splendid, dark film. The clothes are, of course, very much in the trad spirit, although there is more variation and some departures, of course. Although the story is set in the fifties, as I recall, some of the production details are not quite spot on, so that there are details of objects that could have been from a later date. But that's a very minor quibble. The late Anthony Minghella's direction is superb, and of course, the editing (which can make or break a film) is by the phenomenal genius Walter Murch. The acting by all four principal actors (Damon, Law, Paltrow and Blanchett) is also superb.
Please forgive including this lengthy but incisive post in my reply.You've touched upon something very important.
This technique, if that's the right word, of a film's story-telling is something that I really like: The story proceeds along a certain plane, but then, very briefly, there is a scene, or information revealed, in a very oblique, tangential fashion, which makes you realize that the film is about something else at a deeper level. It requires some patience, but the final effect can be powerful. It is so subtle at times, that the realization is almost a victory on the part of the viewer, an "I get it!" moment.
Among the films I have seen, one stands out especially in its effective use of this method: L'Empire des Sens, (titled In the Realm of the Senses, in the US), a French-Japanese film directed by Nagisa Oshima. It is about the intense, obsessive sexual relationship between a prostitute and the owner of the hotel where she meets her clients, set during the mid-1930s. It's a very controversial film, ostensibly about obsession and intimacy, but there is one brief shot at the very end that changes the entire meaning of the film, in an astonishing way. This is a shot of Japanese soldiers marching off to war, and we realize it is the end of the 1930s and Japan has entered the Second World War. To my way of thinking, this shot changed the significance of all the events that had gone before in the film, and placed those events against a historical backdrop that constituted the subtext of the film, and lent a new meaning to the obsession that the film depicted.
IMHO, a work of art succeeds especially well when it has multiple levels of meaning. As a fiction writer, I know that what is left unsaid in a scene is more important than what is being made explicit. As one matures as a writer, one begins to internalize some of these techniques, so that writing a scene with depth and subtext becomes second nature. As John Gardner maintains, the need for profluence, and for maintaining a "vivid and continuous dream" in the mind of the reader is a necessity for good writing. This is also true for filmmaking, I think.
A wonderful little book by the novelist Charles Baxter, called The Art of the Subtext is a must if one wants to understand the use of subtext in fiction.
I have not seen the film so I can't comment directly. I have heard that it is seen as a precursor to some of the events of the past four years of US history, but without seeing the film, it would be hard for me to comment on the connection. I have also read that Francois Truffaut admired the film, but that was quite some time ago.Please forgive including this lengthy but incisive post in my reply.
DrPeter: What are your thoughts regarding Elia Kazan's "A Face In The Crowd" given the past 4yrs of history ?