rec.arts.movies.past-films

In article <13eisflsuklho29@ >,
"Frank . Maloney" wrote:

> David Oberman wrote:
> > "Jim Beaver" wrote:
> >
> >> LOVE ME TONIGHT. Mamoulien really kicked this one in the pants -- in a
> >> good
> >> way. Very impressive production. Neither Chevalier nor MacDonald sends
> >> me,
> >> in particular, but they're certainly charming, and the rest of the movie
> >> is
> >> pretty exciting, cinematically, especially for 1932. The DVD print from
> >> Kino is excellent, I think.
> >
> > I feel about the same way, except I do really like Jeanette MacDonald.
> >
> > I watched "After the Thin Man" yesterday. We've all seen it & probably
> > all like it. I notice that, with each new "Thin Man" in the series,
> > Nick & Nora are treated less & less like sots & more like huggable
> > pixies with twinkle & merriment in their lopsided grins. You can
> > already see this in "After the Thin Man." Just like Greta Garbo, who
> > wanted her Beast back at the end of the Cocteau film, I wanted the
> > drunkards Nick & Nora back from the 1934 "Thin Man."
>
> I quite agree. The moment Nora announced her pregnancy at the end of
> _After the Thin Man_ the series started its decline into mere
> sitcom-murder mystery and I speak as one who loves the series. _The
> Shadow of the Thin Man_ even has Nick, Jr., forcing his father to drink
> milk, and a lot of the tension in the last entry _Song of the Thin Man_
> comes from a supposed kidnapping of little Nickie. Too domestic.

I've never followed the series; so they got pregant, had a kid, and he
grew up within the movies, sort of like Blondie?
>
> However, I must object to the word "drunkards". The Charleses were
> drinkers, but they were never drunk. They could hold their liquor to our
> undying admiration. Nick never had so much as a hang-over, as far as I
> can recall.



--
Why watch the Sci Fi Channel?
For every Flash Gordon, there is an Earthstorm!!