Ask the Dust

[jake_fink]

Ask the Dust *UPDATE*

Robert Towne's (he of Chinatown) film version of one of my most loved books is finally getting seen. Here is a review from Variety:

A Paramount Classics release presented in association with Capitol FilmsCapitol Films of a Cruise/Wagner, VIP Medienfonds 3, Ascendant production. Produced by Tom Cruise, Paula WagnerPaula Wagner, Don GrangerDon Granger, Jonas McCord. Executive producers, Redmond Morris, Mark Roemmich, David Selvan, Andreas Schmid, Andy Grosch, Chris Roberts. Co-producers, Galit Hakmon McCord, Kia Jam. Directed, written by Robert Towne, based on the novel by John Fante.

Arturo Bandini - Colin Farrell
Camilla - Salma Hayek
Hellfrick - Donald Sutherland
Mrs. Hargraves - Eileen Atkins
Vera Rivkin - Idina Menzel
Sammy - Justin Kirk
Solomon - Jeremy Crutchley
Voice of Mencken - Richard Schickel

By TODD MCCARTHY

A film that feels like it's from another time and place, "Ask the Dust" is John Fante's classic novel as if fixed in amber. A long-nourished dream project for Robert Towne, this story of Depression-era down-and-outers in Los Angeles takes place just a stone's throw from the denouement of "Chinatown," with an emphasis on marginal lives that also recalls "The Day of the Locust" and "They Shoot Horses, Don't They?" Highlighted by a strong and sensual performance from Salma Hayek as the doomed heroine, elegant pic's muted quality and the central character's vexingly contrary behavior will keep auds from connecting with characters who themselves have trouble establishing bonds. Commercial prospects are soft for the Paramount Classics release.

For decades, unofficial old-Los Angeles dramatist laureate Towne cherished making Fante's 1939 novel, an autobiographical work about the writer's early struggles while living in a Bunker Hill boarding house. Repeated work-for-hire on Tom Cruise projects such as "Days of Thunder" and the "Mission: Impossible" pics evidently earned Towne enough points with Cruise/Wagner for the company to back the venture at Paramount. Ironically, however, due to the modernization of the city, the film ended up being shot in South Africa, where a large set repping Downtown L.A., circa 1933, was built from scratch, with further embellishments courtesy of CGI.

After retro credits on the turning pages of a book, it's modern computer wizardry that is responsible for the spectacular opening shot, one that will delight old-L.A. nostaligists. Beginning high in the hills, with the ocean visible in the distance, the panoramic perspective descends toward a realistically rendered Downtown, finally coming to rest on a room at the dingy Alta Loma, where young Arturo Bandini (Colin Farrell) is down to his last nickel.

Subsisting on oranges and cigarettes, and with the fierce visage of H.L. Mencken, who intermittently publishes his stories peering down at him from a photo on the wall, Bandini is trying to find his voice as a writer.

Ultimately, it's the city streets, and the lonely, wounded and desperate souls who populate them, that will supply Bandini with material. Mainly, there is Camilla (Hayek), a beautiful Mexican waitress at the nearby Columbia Cafe. From their first meeting, they're drawn together, but Bandini can't help insulting her and nipping the latent romantic possibilities in the bud. Bandini even blows it when the two drive out to the beach one night and Camilla initiates a nude moonlight swim.

Through this scene and beyond, Hayek's sexiness is so palpable you can scarcely believe the virginal but experience-seeking Bandini keeps driving such a ripe and available opportunity away. Instead, he develops an odd bond with a desperately insecure Jewess, Vera Rivkin (Idina Menzel).

When Camilla returns to Bandini once more, she rightly accuses him of being afraid to screw her. In retreat, he heads down to Long Beach to visit Vera, only to be caught in the Long Beach earthquake.

Although the ethnic/racial demarcations were present in the novel, Towne has emphasized them further, especially toward the end when everything between Bandini and Camilla hangs in the balance; as Bandini himself was the victim of anti-Italian prejudice in his Colorado youth, Camilla wrongly assumes he can empathize with what she experiences as a Mexican in California. Pic's final stretch, elaborated significantly from the novel, ends things on a flat note.

Bandini's own shortcomings, a tentativeness and faint-heartedness that mix oddly with a kind of hard-headed arrogance, were acceptable on the page because of the character's first-person observational stance. Watching the man objectively onscreen (despite the abundance of voiceover) is another matter altogether; he's hardly the stuff of screen heroes, or even antiheroes, his behavior perplexing and disappointing. Farrell portrays him credibly and well, echoing at times the exuberant youthfulness of his performance in "A Home at the End of the World," but the man remains a muddle of indecision.

By contrast, Hayek is in full blossom as Camilla. She may not be as cheap and bedraggled-looking at the outset as one imagines the character on the page, but the actress soon brings her to full emotional life as she engages in a self-destructive, even if momentarily fulfilling, to-and-fro with Bandini.

Menzel socks over her needy character in some sad scenes, Donald Sutherland represents a living reminder of "The Day of the Locust" as an aged neighbor of Bandini's, Justin Kirk has some tangy moments as Camilla's boss and sometime lover, and Eileen Atkins is on just long enough as the Alta Loma's presiding matron to inform that the august establishment does not allow Mexicans or Jews. Critic Richard Schickel intones the voice of Mencken.

Enormous effort has gone into the production's look, the brownish, desaturated nature of which makes this Los Angeles seem permanently parched by the Santa Ana winds. Dennis Gassner's production design, which includes the famous Angels' Flight, is wonderful to behold even as it gives the picture more of a '30s backlot feel than of one shot on actual locations. Scenes depicting such other locales as Long Beach (including an amusement park) and Laguna Beach are evocative if minimalist, with Caleb Deschanel's camera deliciously illuminating the settings and the leading players, who have been costumed to a tee by Albert Wolsky.

Score by Ramin Djawadi and Heitor Pereira seemingly takes its cue from Django Reinhardt in the successful pursuit of its flavorsome, offbeat moods.

Camera (Deluxe color), Caleb Deschanel; editor, Robert K. Lambert; music, Ramin Djawadi, Heitor Pereira; production designer, Dennis Gassner; supervising art director, Richard Johnson, art director, Tom Hannam; set decorator, Nancy Haigh; costume designer, Albert Wolsky; sound (Dolby Digital/DTS), Nico Louw; supervising sound editor, Scott A. Hecker; supervising sound mixers, Andy Koyama, Chris Carpenter; visual effects supervisor, Dave Drzewiecki; visual effects, Double Edge Digital, Pacific Title & Art Studio, Lola Visual Effects, Condor Post Cape Town; assistant director, Tommy Gormley; casting, Hank McCann (U.S.), Celestia Fox (U.K.), Ana Feyder (South Africa). Reviewed at Paramount studiosParamount Studios, Los Angeles, Feb. 1, 2006. (In Santa Barbara Film Festival -- opening night.) MPAAMPAA Rating: R. Running time: 117 MIN.

Might there be another Lounger who loves the book, or who may be looking forward to the movie? (I feel so alone sometimes.)

 

[jake_fink]

It appears that I'm the only one who cares, but just in case, the site has been updated and now includes a trailer. I hope you'll check it out.

http://www.askthedust-movie.com/

 

[Feraud]

Jake_fink, I have been meaning to write about this.
You never cease to amaze me with your knowledge of Film, etc.! :cheers1:
I have not read the book but have heard very good comments about it. My 'to read' list is too long and growing daily!
I am looking forward to the film. Will try to read the book first. Thank you for updating the message to include the trailer.

 

[jake_fink]

UPDATE

Robert Towne was at the Cinematheque in Toronto last week for an onstage discussion/Q&A. They were going to show 15 minutes of Dust, but surpirsed us with the whole thing. I had to write piece on it, and may be able to post it here. It's almost 3,000 words, contains a review of the film as well as an overview of the book and the event. There hasn't been much interest in this thread so far, but if anybody has any interest in Towne, the Fante novel or the upcoming film, I'd be happy to post at least an excerpt from the article.

 

[Clyde R.]

Jake,

I,too, was intending to comment but hadn't gotten around to it yet. Although I feel a bit like a barbarian to admit I haven't read the book, I'd love to hear more about the movie. Your comments and/or review would be greatly appreciated!

 

[Harry Lime]

You are not alone.

It appears that I'm the only one who cares, but just in case, the site has been updated and now includes a trailer. I hope you'll check it out.

http://www.askthedust-movie.com/

Jake,

I came upon "Ask the Dusk" the long way, through my long-time love of Bukowski. Bukowski was an admirer and based his own character, Henry Chinaski (and himself) largely on Bandini. I think of these characters when I prowl the old sections of downtown LA.

So like you I am really looking forward to this film. Love the book, love the story. My only fear - Colin Farrel. But who knows, I may be suprised. Mickey Rourke was actually a great Chinaski in that decidely average production of "Bar Fly" so maybe Farrel will suprise. Salma Hayek should be great and Robert Towne has a flair for old LA.

Appreciate the heads up on the low down. Sorry it took awhile to get back. I see good old Feraud is also pitching in, I'm not suprised. The three of us have similar tastes (Nightandtehcity, too. He should be weighing in soon. Shamus, take a peek - this is one you'll like as well.)

Harry Lime

 

[Feraud]

if anybody has any interest in Towne, the Fante novel or the upcoming film, I'd be happy to post at least an excerpt from the article.

Please post at least an excerpt from the article. Then again, why not post the whole thing!?

 

[jake_fink]

A review

Thanks guys.

Here's the first draft. It does contain *SPOILERS* especially if you haven't read the book, but these are little more than plot points, and don't, I think, take away from the novel or the film.

I should also say in advance - and you know how much I was looking forward to this... it is not good news.

I attended ?¢‚Ǩ?ìAn Evening With Robert Towne?¢‚Ǩ? the other night. It had been billed as a conversation with local critic Geoff Pevere, featuring a Q&A and clips, including fifteen minutes of footage from Ask the Dust, his new film as writer/director, based on the novel by John Fante and due for release on March 10th, 2006.

The evening began with an announcement. The conversation would be cut short to leave time for a very special event: Towne?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s new film, Dust, was to be shown in its entirety. There was a buzz of excitement in the auditorium. We were all there as great fans of Towne, and some of us were there too as fans of Fante, in anticipation of the long awaited adaptation of his best known novel.

The conversation was preceded by a clip reel, showing a very few select moments from Towne?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s long career. His scene from the Godfather was shown along with bits from Chinatown, Shampoo, The Last Detail, Tequila Sunrise, Personal Best and Without Limits. The Mission: Impossible movies were notably absent. Towne himself was affable, free and generous with his memories. He frequently went into great detail, then stopped to ask Pevere if he wanted that much detail. What?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s a poor moderator to say? We wanted the details. Frequently his recollections began with the phrase, ?¢‚Ǩ?ìWell, of course X and I were friends?¢‚Ǩ¬¶?¢‚Ǩ? even when talking about those with whom friendship had blown up in his face, which elicited the kind of knowing laughter that you hear at smarty-pants events like this. ?¢‚Ǩ?ìWell, of course Roman [Polanski] and I were friends?¢‚Ǩ¬¶?¢‚Ǩ? Well, of course. The only person he described as anything other than a friend was John Fante, whom he described as ?¢‚Ǩ?ìa crabby, irascible old man,?¢‚Ǩ? who asked what made him think he could adapt Ask the Dust, and who informed Towne that screenwriting was a lousy job. The Q&A that followed was brief but allowed Towne to talk about M:I 2. ?¢‚Ǩ?ìIt was,?¢‚Ǩ? he said, ?¢‚Ǩ?ìhard work. Movies like that are the hardest to write.?¢‚Ǩ? Coming on board he met with director John Woo, who had nothing to offer but detailed storyboards for six carefully choreographed action sequences. All Towne had to do was stick the screenplay in between them. Ask the Dust was shown after a short break.

Ask the Dust is based on the 1939 novel by John Fante which follows the struggles of a young writer as he learns his craft and falls in love. Arturo Bandini is an Italian American come to LA from Colorado to find his fortune. He falls in love with Camilla Lopez, an illiterate Mexican waitress at a diner near his Bunker Hill hotel, while also having an affair with Vera Rivken a young Jewess in Long Beach who knows the books he does, who admires his work and who appreciates great literature. When Vera is killed in the Long Beach earthquake Arturo rushes back to Camilla, but their relationship is doomed, and Camilla disappears into the desert while Arturo?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s final victory, the publication of his novel, is bittersweet. Fante was heavily influenced by Knut Hamsun, and in turn influenced Charles Bukowski, whose screenplay for Barfly develops a similar triangle of down and out writer his troubled love interest and the literary admirer. One of the book?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s strengths is its voice, a balance of the sardonic, a world-weary pose, and the impotent. Arturo?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s struggle is to become a man of the world while still being unable to throw off entirely his old, God-fearing habits of mind. It is also one of the greatest evocations of the young writer?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s attempts at making art, again finding the balance of a particular time and place, particular people and personalities, and the universal question of how to transform this shit before us we call life into art. The great flaw in the book, something that I can?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t quite get around myself, is a flaw, I think, in the author himself, a lack of knowledge, a lack of insight in his portrait of Camilla. The character has a real life counterpart, and in making the transformation to the page Fante seems not to have understood something fundamental about her. Camilla is clearly mentally ill, suffering at the very least from some sort of personality disorder, but Fante the author as much as Bandini the narrator chalks up her behaviour to a marijuana addiction. This is unrealistic at the least, and at worst belies the transformation portrayed in the book of Bandini?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s growth as an artist and a man. The misunderstanding and fear of marijuana, the inability to recognize that Camilla?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s problems are well beyond her use of the drug, is still purely small town Colorado. Still, the book is otherwise rich and vital and an enourmous pleasure.

The book fell out of print, and Fante would have died in obscurity if Bukowski hadn?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t revived his reputation somewhat by proclaiming his debt to the aged, blind and legless author. (He?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢d lost his vision and his legs to diabetes brought on by chronic alcoholism.) Bukowski?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s publisher, Black Sparrow Press, began to republish everything that had fallen out of print and anything that had never made it, and Fante died, consequently, in near obscurity rather than full in 1983. Towne had read Ask the Dust when researching Chinatown in 1972 and had been wanting, and at times trying, to make a film of the novel since at least the late seventies. The completion of the film marks a very long journey for the work from high regard to obscurity, from elusive obsession to reality. Expectations were, for very good reason, high indeed.

Towne?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s film, however, is an almost complete failure. The problems begin with the screenplay; written by the master of structure balanced with naturalism, it lacks both. It alternately lurches or languishes really only hitting it?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s stride well into the third act. As well, the dialogue and situations, though frequently taken directly from the book, seem ragged, shopworn, or just plain silly. The meet-cute in the diner should be pure cinema, but plays as clich?ɬ©, not helped in the least by the performances. Towne has made the wise decision of shifting focus away from Camilla?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s marijuana use, but has also evened out her erratic behaviour, making her a more tragic figure, and a less interesting one. He has also played up the issue of race and ethnicity, present in the book, but brought into sharper focus in the movie. The nihilistic and moving end of the novel is transformed into a standard deathbed scene followed by a pale shadow of the book?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s walk into the Mojave and the hurling of the finished work into the desert, now just a romantic gesture in the new context.

The film suffers most from poor casting. Salma Hayek as Camilla just about works, but she is too old for the role and, somehow, sexy but not quite senuously passionate enough. Her feet are an object of erotic infatuation for the very Catholic Bandini, but neither she nor Towne know what to do with them, so all the talk of shoes, and the flipping off of said, seems to go nowhere and mean nothing. As well, Camilla is described as a Mayan Princess, with features that would seem to be Indian, ?¢‚Ǩ?ì her nose was Mayan, flat, with large nostrils... lips heavily rouged with the thickness of a negress?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢?¢‚Ǩ¬¶eyes at a high slant?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ skin dark?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ she was a racial type ?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ she was beautiful, but she was too strange for me.?¢‚Ǩ? Hayek, however, looks more Mediterranean, a ?¢‚Ǩ?ìracial type?¢‚Ǩ? to be sure, but that is pure Hollywood all-purpose brunette, and not in the least strange when set beside Colin Farrell as Bandini. Farrell is the weakest part of the entire project. He is also poorly cast, also too old, though callow enough to pass. He is the wrong ethnicity, a dark-haired Irishman who looks Italian American enough, but seems to lack confidence in his accent, for what other reason could there be for delivering every line in the same tonsilur tone. There are numerous scenes of him climbing out his hotel window and crossing the street; these he handles well, climbing adequately and walking in the time honoured method of one foot in front of the other. When called on to speak, or to portray some emotion using his face he runs into trouble. Aside from the monotonous delivery, Farrell seems intent on overselling every moment, without seeming to understand what the moment means to the film as a whole. Consequently his performance fails to cohere, which is a minor issue when set against the number of times his performance is just out and out embarrassing, as when he relies on the acrobatic use of his prodigious eyebrows, throwing them up high on his forehead, cuddling them up close to the bridge of his elfish nose, or simply raising one in inquiry. It?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s like watching someone trained in silent cinema. Other roles are small and mostly adequate, though Idina Mezel as Vera Rivken is a touch too daffy, perhaps trying to make the most of her very small part.

Towne, in his role as director, is about on par with his work adapting the screenplay. He has the difficult task of trying to make watching a writer write ?¢‚Ǩ‚Äú and not write ?¢‚Ǩ‚Äú interesting. Wim Wenders went spectacularly off the rails when trying to do the same in Hammett, and Arliss Howard made a uniquely unsuccessful job of it in Big Bad Love, so it is fraught territory. Towne manages not to go too far wrong, relying on the more or less standard issue dissolves?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ fingers on keys?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ letters appearing on paper?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ carriage moving?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ clack clack clack. But watching someone write is not interesting. Believe me, this I know. Writing itself can be interesting, and reading what has been written can be interesting, even when what has been written is about writing ?¢‚Ǩ‚Äú all of that is often interesting. Watching someone write is difficult to handle on film because it is simply, inherently, not very interesting to watch. That?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s why there are more movies about fistfights and explosions than there are films about writing novels or letters. As if to make-up for the long scenes of typing Towne has two long, artfully lit nude/love scenes. The first, a midnight swim in the ocean, is dominated by the sound of the waves, and brings to mind the pounding surf of The Long Goodbye. It is an effective, cinematic moment. The second is again, a standard issue love scene the likes of which the average movie-goer has seen hundreds, if not thousands of times. And that fairly sums up Towne?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s work here as director: a nice moment amongst many many uninteresting ones, with no particular style or aesthetic at work, and no real help coming from his lead. The film simply fails to gel.

In a film like this, a period film, one would be remiss not to mention the art direction. It is adequate. The film opens with a long tracking shot across old Los Angeles and right into Bandini?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s Bunker Hill hotel room. It is a well-crafted shot, but artificial in the extreme, the CGI used to make a realistic image that doesn?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t seem the least bit real. That shot establishes the approach for the rest of the film. Bunker Hill is depicted in all it?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s tawdry glory, with passing trolleys and Angels?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢ Flight rising in the background. It fools the eye, but feels phony, not unlike the big set-piece movies of yesteryear, shot on Hollywood soundstages and sets but passing, more or less, for Paris or India, the old south, old Chicago or ancient Egypt. The cinematography too has a self-consciousness about it, a flatness that seems to be in imitation of old photographs, and a gratuitous use of blue back lighting for night scenes ?¢‚Ǩ‚Äú so much in fact, that it felt at times like watching a music video from the eighties. Overall it lacks the reality, the naturalism, the sense of space that other period films have managed ?¢‚Ǩ‚Äú films like Chinatown, Bound for Glory, The Godfather I & II or Once Upon a Time in America. Even King Kong, using more or less the same technology, created a New York that seemed much more real (on a parking lot in New Zealand rather than Dust?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s football pitch in South Africa). Costuming for Colin Farrell seemed out of place, appearing too much like something from the teens of last century rather than the early thirties. Perhaps that was intentional, his small-town, behind-the-times Italian immigrant roots showing in his hand-me-down suit. But how to explain it after the scene in which he comes home with new clothes and a hat box?

Afterward I found myself thinking of another film, never a good sign for the one I?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢ve just seen. It was Dan Ireland?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s The Whole Wide World, a film also set in the Depression, also about a writer, Robert E Howard, creator of Conan the Barbarian. It must have cost a fraction of what Dust cost, and yet it is a much more effective film. It has a tighter structure, it portrays the process of writing in an interesting way, and it has a much stronger cast (I?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢d have loved to see D?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢Onofrio as Bandini had the film been made ten or fifteen years ago). But if I recall correctly, it failed to find an audience. The prospects for Ask the Dust are at least as bleak. As well, it is unlikely to do much about bringing people around to the book, though there may well be plans to release a new edition in tandem with the release of the film. It?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s a disappointment, especially for those of us who had such high hopes, who love the novel and who respect Towne?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s work so highly. It?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s bad news too for people who admire serious films about characters, whether based on a literary source or not; we want those films to succeed, to prove that there is an audience for something other than gross-out comedy and comic-book movies. That may be a heavy burden to lay on a filmmaker, but one would think, if anyone had the chops for it, it would have been Robert Towne. Who knows, it may represent a lost opportunity for him, though one can?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t say for sure until sometime in the future, when at another talk he reveals all the details around Ask the Dust. I can hear it now, ?¢‚Ǩ?ìWell of course Tom [Cruise the producer] and I were friends?¢‚Ǩ¬¶?¢‚Ǩ?

 

[jake_fink]

AN INTERVIEW WITH ROBERT TOWNE

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/indietopnews.php?id=13404

 

[mysterygal]

the movie sounds awesome...I too must admit I haven't read the book, but I'm always up for a good movie (which is few and far between it seems these days) actually, I'm really interested in reading some of the classics, especially since my daughter has got a great enthusiasm herself for it....I just got done reading pretty much every Agatha Christi book there was but I'm wanting to expand some horizons....were should I start?

 

[SGB]

Did this movie ever get released to theaters or just straight to DVD? Watched the DVD last night, not impressed. I can see why it went straight to DVD if that is in fact the case.

SGB

 

[Mr. 'H']

It was in theatres here in Ireland for only two weeks.

I wa so annoyed it had missed it, I really wanted to see it.

I love the "feel" of old LA, that of LA Confidential, True Confessions, etc.

 

[happyfilmluvguy]

I just rented this film. Great set design, great atmosphere for Downtown LA. The film is a bit slow at the beginning, but it eventually picks up. The only problem I had with it was that the director seemed to be filming it in a classic movie style, and it didn't go over too well. A lot of the dialogue was cheesy too I believe. I liked the music over all. Almost Third Man like, but with a couple more instruments. I'd give it a C Grade for story and a B for set and wardrobe. Just seeing 3rd St. in 1939 was good enough for me.

 

[happyfilmluvguy]

I'm also adding the film reminded me of an episode of the Box 13 radio program, writer trying to find a story, meets a mysterious girl, goes off on adventure. It's the same with Moulin Rouge's story. Anyone who's heard the show and the film might know what I'm talking about.

 

[Feraud]

I have heard Ask The Dust is a classic in Literature, I see it will not make that status in film. I found absolutely no chemistry between Hayek and Farrell. I found Colin Farrell's character very annoying in griping about "not making it in L.A.", getting the girl, blah, blah, meanwhile there is this amazing beautiful woman in front of him! He is stupidly dumping coffee on tables, and treating her like garbage. What guy goes swimming au naturel with Salma Hayek and gets into a fight with her??
When I am wondering if these two have a slight attraction to each other, then how can I deal with other issues in the film?
Suffice it to say, I did not finish this movie.

P.S. The clothes and hats were nice.

 

[Mike in Seattle]

I recently got the DVD from a friend, and I enjoyed it. I haven't read the book, so that might be why some think Farrell & Hayak were miscast. Sometimes you read a book and you imagine the characters differently than who they ultimately cast in the movie. (Josh Hartnett as Bucky Bleichart?!?!?! But that's another thread...)

I wondered why the Donald Sutherland character was there - was he an alcoholic, drug addict, someone with tuberculosis or some other medical condition? Farrell's character had only been in town a short time, but they'd had interaction sometime before the first time Sutherland appears, Farrell's reminding him he borrow money. I don't think he did anything to propel the storyline.

It wasn't a great movie. But I thought was good. The costumes & recreation of Bunker Hill with Angel's Flight & Crocker Mansion were amazing.

 

[happyfilmluvguy]

I just have to say this one shot was amazing. This won't spoil the movie for you, but this is just a set of 3rd Street in Downtown LA. It was partially CGI as well. You can see Angel's Flight and Bunker Hill at the end of it.

 

[jake_fink]

I just have to say this one shot was amazing. This won't spoil the movie for you, but this is just a set of 3rd Street in Downtown LA. It was partially CGI as well. You can see Angel's Flight and Bunker Hill at the end of it.

This shot is the only reason to see this movie. It looks earlier than 1933 to me, but there it is, all that waiting and expectation distilled into one evocative image. As always, it seems, the book was better.

 

[Mike in Seattle]

Yep - that set was built on a high school or college football field. About half the hill is actually at the end of the field - the tunnel only went back far enough for cars to drive in or out, and the cable car to roll out of. Most of the filming was done in & around Capetown, South Africa. They did an amazing job for something that wasn't a big-budget blockbuster production with money coming out the producers' ears.

 

[Nick Charles]

Has anyone seen this, I was watching it today and it seems really good.