What Was The Last Movie You Watched?

[Doctor Strange]

No, it takes place in NYC. I personally doubt this is an early example of product placement. More likely it was just an actual newspaper.

 

[Fading Fast]

Have not seen "Executive Suite" but your
question got me thinking.
John Wanamaker Department Store was the first department store in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and one of the first department stores in the United States.

Does the movie take place in Philadelphia
or is one of the characters from there?

No, it takes place in NYC. I personally doubt this is an early example of product placement. More likely it was just an actual newspaper.

You are correct that, that scene takes place in NYC, but the movie takes place more/mainly in Millburn Pennsylvania (where the fictional company in the movie is located) than NYC. I'm sincerely not trying to be nitpicky, but pointing out that since, as 2Jakes notes, Wanamaker is a Philly / Pennsylvania company, they might - maybe - have wanted to advertise in the movie.

The only reason I think it's even possible is that it was an incredibly visible ad for several seconds which the camera framed perfectly. If intentional, (at least in today's world), it would cost some real money in a star-filled Hollywood release like "Executive Suite."

 

[2jakes]

No, it takes place in NYC. I personally doubt this is an early example of product placement. More likely it was just an actual newspaper.

I have not seen the movie.
This is what I read which is why I was
asking if one of the characters was
from Pennsylvania, or part of the story has something to do from that location....origin of John Wanamaker Store.



Executive Suite plot
(in part)
While in New York City to meet with investment bankers, 56-year-old Avery Bullard, president and driving force of the Tredway Corporation, a major furniture manufacturing company in the town of Millburgh, Pennsylvania, drops dead in the street. As he collapses, he drops his wallet. It is picked up by a bystander, emptied of its cash, and shoved into a wastebasket. Without the wallet, there is no way to immediately identify the body as Bullard.......

 

[Doctor Strange]

Sorry, I hadn't seen it in a while, I forgot it took place in PA.

But Wanamker's was a major NY chain too. We had a huge Wanamaker's (what would be called an anchor store... in the mall terminology that would come later) at the Cross County Shopping Center in Yonkers, NY when I was a kid in the sixties.

 

[Fading Fast]

So is the consensus advertisement or happenstance?

 

[2jakes]

So is the consensus advertisement or happenstance?

Based on my experience in the studios, not much is left to chance.
A scene takes time and the daily rushes are gone over to see the results
or what needs to be worked on. One of the technicians is assigned the task
of making a recording with notes and photos of the set. If, for example, a
cigarette is in the scene, he has to make sure that it is about the same length
for continuity.
A scene can sometimes take all morning.
Another technician will have a tank on his back with smoke, I’m not sure what kind
of smoke was used, but before shooting, he would spray the set with it,
creating a specific mood for the cameras.
You once asked me about the movie with Audrey Hepburn when they were
shooting in New York in the early morning.
I believe I made reference that they never go with available light.
The umbrellas and lights they use is what they depend on.
Ever noticed film noir scenes at night, especially the streets or pavements
which mostly look as if it has rained?
That’s made possible by a water truck!
Imagine the frustrations Howard Hughes must’ve had in trying to find
the right clouds for his epic film, “Hell’s Angels” (1930)


Not so sure about 1954 when this movie was made.

 

[Benzadmiral]

Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle. We laughed a lot. Group consensus: Jack Black steals the movie.

Jack Black does that, and startles me every time I see him. You think he's just going to play a stocky doofus, and then . . . somehow, his character winds up being recognizably (rather than just comically) human. See his musician/teacher in School of Rock and his Carl Denham in the 2005 King Kong. I haven't seen him in much, but those two performances surprised me.

 

[Fading Fast]

Based on my experience in the studios, not much is left to chance.
A scene takes time and the daily rushes are gone over to see the results
or what needs to be worked on. One of the technicians is assigned the task
of making a recording with notes and photos of the set. If, for example, a
cigarette is in the scene, he has to make sure that it is about the same length
for continuity.
A scene can sometimes take all morning.
Another technician will have a tank on his back with smoke, I’m not sure what kind
of smoke was used, but before shooting, he would spray the set with it,
creating a specific mood for the cameras.
You once asked me about the movie with Audrey Hepburn when they were
shooting in New York in the early morning.
I believe I made reference that they never go with available light.
The umbrellas and lights they use is what they depend on.
Ever noticed film noir scenes at night, especially the streets or pavements
which mostly look as if it has rained?
That’s made possible by a water truck!
Imagine the frustrations Howard Hughes must’ve had in trying to find
the right clouds for his epic film, “Hell’s Angels” (1930)


Not so sure about 1954 when this movie was made.

I'm sure Lizzie can provide some color around "Not so sure about 1954 when this movie was made," but I know movies were doing product placement with a lot of thought and contractual agreement at least as far back as the '30s. Hence, I just find it hard to believe that a giant Wanamaker ad was highly visible - basically framed - in a scene for several seconds by accident.

 

[2jakes]

I'm sure Lizzie can provide some color around "Not so sure about 1954 when this movie was made," but I know movies were doing product placement with a lot of thought and contractual agreement at least as far back as the '30s. Hence, I just find it hard to believe that a giant Wanamaker ad was highly visible - basically framed - in a scene for several seconds by accident.

Shall I light up the LizzieMaine signal?

 

[Fading Fast]

Shall I light up the LizzieMaine signal?

I think so, Commissioner 2jakes. (Said in my best Chief O'Hara brogue.)

 

[Doctor Strange]

Jack Black does that, and startles me every time I see him. You think he's just going to play a stocky doofus, and then . . . somehow, his character winds up being recognizably (rather than just comically) human. See his musician/teacher in School of Rock and his Carl Denham in the 2005 King Kong. I haven't seen him in much, but those two performances surprised me.

Another surprising Jack Black performance I strongly recommend is in Richard Linklater's Bernie. Like a lot of comic actors, he can be very impressive when he tamps down his usual shtick and actually plays a part.

They say comedy is harder than drama, yet in every era, when a comedian plays a serious role (Charlie Chaplin, Jackie Gleason, Jerry Lewis and many others)... the critics and public are invariably surprised how well they pull it off.

 

[2jakes]

Shall I light up the LizzieMaine signal?

I think so, Commissioner 2jakes. (Said in my best Chief O'Hara brogue.)

Help!

 

[Doctor Strange]

Last night's film - Maudie (2016). Interesting biopic about Canadian folk artist Maude Lewis with a(nother) tremendous lead performance by Sally Hawkins. A strong performance by Ethan Hawke too, as her (initially) brutish, inarticulate husband. I was impressed that he was willing to be so unsympathetic in the role.

The only thing I didn't like about it was that the timeframe wasn't made clear. I assumed it started in the late forties and went to the very early sixties. Turns out that the events depicted stretched from 1938 to 1970.

 

[LizzieMaine]

My best guess on the Wanamakers ad is that there would have been little point for Wanamakers to spend the money for product placement in a movie that would play all over the world when their primary clientele was regional. So yeah, I think it was most likely what was on the back page of whichever paper it was for that day.

Given that the film is "Executive Suite," and it's about Executives, the paper is almost certainly the Herald Tribune, the nice, safe, bourgeois Republican choice for the executive who wants to seem thoughtful, but not a prissy intellectual. A proper executive wouldn't be caught dead reading a Hearst sheet, the World-Telegram and the Post were too pink, they'd be thought eggheads for reading the Times, and even though they all read the Daily News on the sly, if they were caught with it they'd claim they found it on the subway.

 

[2jakes]

My best guess on the Wanamakers ad is that there would have been little point for Wanamakers to spend the money for product placement in a movie that would play all over the world when their primary clientele was regional. So yeah, I think it was most likely what was on the back page of whichever paper it was for that day.

Given that the film is "Executive Suite," and it's about Executives, the paper is almost certainly the Herald Tribune, the nice, safe, bourgeois Republican choice for the executive who wants to seem thoughtful, but not a prissy intellectual. A proper executive wouldn't be caught dead reading a Hearst sheet, the World-Telegram and the Post were too pink, they'd be thought eggheads for reading the Times, and even though they all read the Daily News on the sly, if they were caught with it they'd claim they found it on the subway.

Thank you LizzieMaine.

 

[Zombie_61]

...Another technician will have a tank on his back with smoke, I’m not sure what kind of smoke was used, but before shooting, he would spray the set with it, creating a specific mood for the cameras...

I don't know what they've used throughout the history of filmmaking, but in the late-80s to early-90s those tanks were partially filled with oil that was heated just enough to produce that smoke. In Oliver Stone's 1991 movie The Doors they used the Olympic Auditorium in Los Angeles for the "Miami concert" scenes, and for four days straight they filled the place with that oil smoke, both for general atmosphere and to give the impression that the "audience" was smoking during the show. Of course, fire and health ordinances being what they are, they wouldn't let us actually smoke inside the building unless it was necessary for one of the actors to do so for the shot.

 

[Fading Fast]

My best guess on the Wanamakers ad is that there would have been little point for Wanamakers to spend the money for product placement in a movie that would play all over the world when their primary clientele was regional. So yeah, I think it was most likely what was on the back page of whichever paper it was for that day.

Given that the film is "Executive Suite," and it's about Executives, the paper is almost certainly the Herald Tribune, the nice, safe, bourgeois Republican choice for the executive who wants to seem thoughtful, but not a prissy intellectual. A proper executive wouldn't be caught dead reading a Hearst sheet, the World-Telegram and the Post were too pink, they'd be thought eggheads for reading the Times, and even though they all read the Daily News on the sly, if they were caught with it they'd claim they found it on the subway.

Thank you - as always great insight and intelligent analysis.

As to newspaper selection. Back in the early '90s, I worked for the trading department of the Union Bank of Switzerland's US-based investment bank. It was run at the time by a scripted-out-of-central-casting stern, taciturn head-of-trading who had the ability to, stealth-like, pop up behind you at the absolute worst times and, in short, staccato sentences, drill into whatever trading difficulty you had and were hoping to resolve before it came to his attention. We, the traders, swore he had some super-human internal radar that could sense when you were losing money.

I lived only a few blocks from the office - all of this was pre-internet - so I used to buy the papers and get into work very early to read them (as most people read them on their commute) before others arrived. Realize, I'm talking about 5am to 6:30am (most arrived right around 6:30am as we had a morning meeting at 7am, so you needed some time to get a handle on the over-night trading to prep).

For the morning, I'd buy the WSJ, Post and Daily News - the WSJ for work, the other two for life and fun (although, the Post, at that time, had a decent business section and some strong financial market writers). The WSJ would take me about an hour to get through. I'd start with that as that was work and, as a reward, I would spend about 20 minutes with the Post / News afterwards (and usually took them home to finish at night) and then I'd start prepping for the meeting / trading day.

The head of trading usually got in about 6:30am (occasionally earlier) and would stay in his office until about 6:45am when he'd come out to the floor to instill a little pre-meeting angst in a few chosen targets. As he quietly walked behind the traders - now, super intensely starring at the banks of screens in front of them - you silently prayed he wasn't going to stop at your desk and start "chatting" with you.

Anywho, one morning at 6:10am, I'm blithely reading and enjoying the Daily News (comics of course) and, without making one freakin' sound, the Head of Trading is standing behind me and, without introduction, in a cold, monotone but imperious voice says, "Mr. Fast, we don't have time to read The Daily News at UBS, do we?" Involuntarily confirming that all of my bowel muscles could tighten at once while flash perspiring from every pour in my body, I looked up over my shoulder to stammer out a "no sir," at which point, he walked away.

Later, when the other traders started to get in and I told some of them what happened, half said, "well, you were on your own time and should have told him so." When I said "would you have and answer honestly -" everyone acknowledged, some grudgingly, that they wouldn't have. In a way, it turned out to be one of those stories that we all kinda enjoyed for years, so almost worth it - but not on the day it happened.

 

[2jakes]

^^^^^
Reminds me of the time when my news director made the work schedule for
the 10pm newscast but did not assign enough people to do the various tasks
necessary to do the broadcast. I mentioned this to her in the afternoon
and she assured me she would take care of it by staying to help.

I had several stories to edit and was having difficulty with the reporter who
would not shorten the narration of her story to the allowed time, otherwise
her lengthy package would knock out the other stories during air time.
Come 10 pm my news director had left.
I was still editing at air time. I asked my producer to go set the studio cameras
and tell the anchors there would be no camera changes from one to the other
and to read the news from their scripts because there was no one to run
the teleprompters and pay attention to their headsets because there was no
one to give visual cues with the studio cameras.

I asked my producer if he could finish editing while I went to the control room
to roll the news tapes that were ready to go on the air live.

"I don't know how to edit !"he yelled .
"Ok then... go to the control room and roll the news tapes !" I yelled.

"I don't know how”, he cried!
"Hell do the best you can!" I told him.

It was a disaster!

Next morning in front of everybody including the General mgr. of the station.
My news director asked me...

"What the hell happened last night?"

I yelled back...
"What happened is....you left!
All I had was a producer who didn’t know jack !"

The GM shook his head and walked away.
My news director gave me the silent treatment for about a week.

It was good she did that.
It gave me a chance to take a break.
But after a week we made up.
She treated me to a fine steak.
I can be had easy!

 

[bluesmandan]

Secret of the Incas with Charlton Heston. The scenes with the Peruvian opera singer were downright weird, but I liked the movie.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Fading Fast]

I caught about 40 minutes of "The Petrified Forest" on TCM the other day (had to pull myself away as I can't keep watching this movie).

This is one of my favorite movies ever (my comments on it here if you care, http://www.thefedoralounge.com/thre...ovie-you-watched.20830/page-1112#post-2161030) and noticed again that it has an incredible visual appeal.

The movie's desert scenes have a Wyeth quality to them. While I'm far from a Wyeth expert, I don't believe he painted desert scenes, but still, the movie's long panning shots echo his paintings like this one:


One of the movie's desert shot


The movie's director, like Wyeth, knew where to put the "lens" to capture enough detail, but not too much detail, to set the mood and give the feeling of both isolation and, for me, America of a certain time.



Also watched "Thanks For Sharing" a 2012 by-the-numbers "addicts in various stages of rehab (or not) and how it affects them and those around them" movie. Going back to the '30s, with films like "A Star is Born" or "Grand Hotel" (and I'm sure earlier, I'm just not very familiar with pre-'30s films), there is a pretty robust number of films in this genre.

For my money, "The Lost Weekend" and "Leaving Las Vegas" are the two most impactful - emotionally wrenching - of the lot, but that's a pretty personal call. "Thanks for Sharing," is uneven, takes time to get going, focusses mainly on sex addition and doesn't bring much that's fresh to the discussion, but still works okay for a pass-the-time movie. The singer Pink pops up in a minor role and, while not playing a character that far from some of the outward appearances of her real-life persona, shows reasonable, if not overwhelming, acting skills.