Generation Entitlement, that’s my generation, doesn’t care or have time for greatness. They just want something fast and goofy, artistic but not great, hence why “El Topo” and Wes Anderson are so popular right now, and hardly anyone strives to be like Welles or Herzog. Also, my generation heavily favors gratuitous violence and pointlessly explicit sex in their films, because they think it is “edgy” and “real”—hence films like “Irreversible”. They don’t believe in the soul, therefore they don’t try to pander to anyone deep nor do they want to move anyone. They just want something that looks unique and quirky, has either dry, bloodless humor or something overly serious, dark, and senselessly graphic.
Also, film has been a self-destructive art since day one. Just look at Stroheim, battling the studio for his artistic vision, a fate that as befallen so many greats since him.
Generation Entitlement, that’s my generation, doesn’t care or have time for greatness. They just want something fast and goofy, artistic but not great, hence why “El Topo” and Wes Anderson are so popular right now, and hardly anyone strives to be like Welles or Herzog. Also, my generation heavily favors gratuitous violence and pointlessly explicit sex in their films, because they think it is “edgy” and “real”—hence films like “Irreversible”. They don’t believe in the soul, therefore they don’t try to pander to anyone deep nor do they want to move anyone. They just want something that looks unique and quirky, has either dry, bloodless humor or something overly serious, dark, and senselessly graphic.
Also, film has been a self-destructive art since day one. Just look at Stroheim, battling the studio for his artistic vision, a fate that as befallen so many greats since him.
Whoa, now…Strohiem failed because he was ahead of his time. “Greed” was TAKEN from him, butchered and left on the cutting room floor. Anyone who knocks Stroheim doesn’t know the whole story, Stroheim dreamed of the day when cinema could be seen in parts, he envisioned “Greed” this way, but the studios told him he was crazy and nobody would want to watch that.
“Greed” was 9.5 hours long originally. I’m sure if we could’ve seen the entire thing, it would’ve played out very similarly to “Alexanderplatz”!
Fassbinder’s work is what Stroheim dreamed of! I wonder if Fassbinder knew of his work, they were truly kindered spirits.
Well, it seems Orson Welles and Ingmar Bergman weren’t fond of each other.
“For me he’s just a hoax. It’s empty. It’s not interesting. It’s dead. Citizen Kane, which I have a copy of – is all the critics’ darling, always at the top of every poll taken, but I think it’s a total bore. Above all, the performances are worthless. The amount of respect that movie’s got is absolutely unbelievable. Aghed: How about The Magnificent Ambersons? Bergman: Nah. Also terribly boring. And I’ve never liked Welles as an actor, because he’s not really an actor. In Hollywood you have two categories, you talk about actors and personalities. Welles was an enormous personality, but when he plays Othello, everything goes down the drain, you see, that’s when he’s croaks. In my eyes he’s an infinitely overrated filmmaker.”
—Bergman on Welles
“I don’t condemn that very northern, very Protestant world of artists like Bergman; it’s just not where I live. The Sweden I like to visit is a lot of fun. But Bergman’s Sweden always reminds me of something Henry James said about Ibsen’s Norway—that it was full of “the odor of spiritual paraffin.” How I sympathize with that! I share neither Bergman’s interests nor his obsessions. He’s far more foreign to me than the Japanese.”
—Orson Welles to Kenneth Tynan, 1967
Link: http://www.wellesnet.com/?p=432
Personally, I have to say I much prefer Welles’ films to Bergman’s. Welles’ style is just much more theatrical, iconic and epic, whereas Bergman is inward, overly self-critical and plodding. I respect his work as an artist, but for me, Welles’ creations are just much more alive and relevant, whereas some of Bergman’s films seem terribly dated and a bit pretentious.
Thoughts? There’s no right or wrong, I just like to hear other opinions.
I was just wondering if anyone else would compare them, because I’ve personally always been much more attracted to Welles than Bergman. I was curious if anyone else had similar feelings, or if someone preferred Bergman to Welles.
Well, no wonder why so many of his films strike me as one dimensional, if he was the spiteful male chauvinist (isn’t it so obvious in Persona???) this thread has informed me of.
Thanks guys, for giving me more reasons to dislike him.
Ah, I’m glad to see this topic get some life into! I love arguments, what can I say. It’s great to watch the great genesis duke it out against each other. We might just learn something in the process. I love hearing a good criticism as much as good defense.
But honestly, I never saw humanitarianism in Bergman. The films of his I’ve seen are so self-absorbed and dry, with maybe an exception for The Seventh Seal, which extends itself in allegory thankfully. I’m debating whether or not to watch Fanny and Alexander, since I found some of his other works a bit unfeeling and dull, is it worth it to try and watch such a huge chunk of time? Will I find it worth while?
I’ve seen Persona, Winter Light, and The Seventh Seal. I enjoyed the latter, or at least found something of value in it, but the other two just really underwhelmed and even bothered me, really overrated although the cinematic craft was present. Maybe those you recommend are the better ones?
Bergman criticized Htichcock as well?? With statements like that, he really does want me to hate him…
Well, I’ll give Fanny and Alexander a shot eventually. I found Winter Light to be horribly dated, a kind of one dimensional illustration on a three dimensional topic. Plus the entire thing was sluggish and almost had me asleep, on a topic I’m usually quite interested in. It takes a lot to almost bore me.
The Seventh Seal is classic, and while Bergman’s dry style still isn’t my taste, the story is a good one. I think his characters are very simple, hence allegory is good for him.
I’m glad to see no Welles haters here, thankfully. :) Yet, anyhow.
“Though, personally, I see a few similarities in theme, especially in films such as The Trial, Citizen Kane, Mr. Arkadin, and Touch of Evil. But yeah, overall it seemed that Welles pretty much made whatever film project he had the time and money to make at that moment.
And there are more “distractions” (if one could call them that) in Welles’ work that could possibly detract from the impact of the storyline for some viewers."
Well, that’s what I like about Welles. The variation in his work is great. What distractions do you speak of?
I’ve seen lots of films with bad stills here, like black and white production shots of color films, or films that could use better representative stills. Also, some films just have the wrong still altogether, from the wrong movies.
This thread we can fix them, post link to new stills for each film. If one already exists on this topic, please inform me…
Quote: “Sometimes the only thing that is as satisfying as doing the best work you can do, is to create an atmosphere where others can do the best work they can possibly do.”
Biography:
Involved in film animation from the young age of 12, Richard Williams’ international reputation as a true innovator grew so much that by 1990 he was voted “the Animator’s Animator” by a poll in the London Times, and a commentator for the New York Times has called Williams “miles ahead of anyone in the world of animation.” Williams’ work has spanned classic hand-animation style and incorporates contemporary computer animation methods.
In the late ’40s, Williams worked for both Disney and UPA studios, ultimately leaving for England in 1955 where he created his wonderful 33-minute animated film The Little Island (1958), which won the BAFTA Award for Best Animated Film in 1959. This piece gained him immediate recognition as a professional and highly talented animator.
This was followed with A Lecture on Man and Love Me Love Me Love Me in 1962, Circus Drawings (1964), Diary of a Madman (1965), The Dermis Probe (1966), and Nasrudin (1972). The made-for-TV version of A Christmas Carol (1971) won Williams his first Oscar. Williams worked on the unfortunately nearly forgotten film Raggedy Ann and Andy: A Musical Adventure (1977) which has some charming songs by Joe Raposo, as well as advanced animation and characters somewhat reminiscent of the Beatles’ Yellow Submarine (1968).
Williams has also designed and animated title sequences for several feature films, including the Blake Edwards/Peter Sellers vehicles Return of the Pink Panther (1974), The Pink Panther Strikes Again (1976), Woody Allen’s What’s New Pussycat? (1965) directed by Clive Donner, Casino Royale (1967), and linking sequences for The Charge of the Light Brigade (1968).
Williams is arguably best known as the director of animation and designer of the characters for Who Framed Roger Rabbit? (1988). For this project, Williams won two Academy Awards including a Special Achievement Award. Besides his three Oscars, Williams has received three British Academy Awards, an Emmy, and an astonishing 246 international awards.
In 1995 he offered the Richard Williams Animation Masterclasses for professionals and students which are conducted in London, Hollywood, New York, San Francisco, Vancouver, Sydney, Hong Kong, France, and Denmark. As an extension of his teaching, Williams has authored the acclaimed book The Animator’s Survival Kit (2001). Williams founded his own studio which continues to turn out animation films, as well as myriad prize-winning commercials. In 1995, Williams also animated, directed, and co-wrote the musical Arabian Knight with the voices of Vincent Price, Matthew Broderick, Eric Bogosian, and Jennifer Beal.
Quote: “I never approved of talkies. Silent movies were well on their way to developing an entirely new art form. It was not just pantomine, but something wonderfully expressive.”
Bio:
“The First Lady of the Silent Screen,” Lillian Gish was the movie industry’s first true actress. A pioneer of fundamental film performing techniques, she was the first star to recognize the many crucial differences between acting for the stage and acting for the screen, and while her contemporaries painted their performances in broad, dramatic strokes, Gish delivered finely etched, nuanced turns carrying a stunning emotional impact. While by no means the biggest or most popular actress of the silent era, she was the most gifted, her seeming waiflike frailty masking unparalleled reserves of physical and spiritual strength. More than any other early star, she fought to earn film recognition as a true art form, and her achievements remain the standard against which those of all other actors are measured.
Born Lillian de Guiche October 14, 1893, in Springfield, OH, Gish, her younger sister, Dorothy, and their mother, actress Mary Gish, soon relocated to New York. Beginning their acting careers not long after, the girls were in short time the family breadwinners. Among their colleagues was another child actress, Mary Pickford, who in 1909 traveled west to Hollywood to pursue a career in the movies. She found work with the famed director D.W. Griffith, and soon persuaded him to recruit the Gish sisters for his Biograph Studios’ repertory company of actors. Lillian and Dorothy debuted together in 1912’s An Unseen Enemy and over the next several years appeared both together and independently in dozens of the director’s one- and two-reelers. While overshadowed by Pickford’s fame, Lillian was the Griffith stable’s most skilled actress, and she starred in many of his greatest works, including 1915’s The Birth of a Nation, 1916’s Intolerance, 1920’s Way Down East, and 1922’s Orphans of the Storm.
With her delicate, luminous beauty, Gish was perfect for Griffith’s Victorian-styled melodramas; wide-eyed and restrained, her face a marvel of innocence and nuance, she was nothing less than ideal for Griffith’s landmark use of close-up photography. Together, they worked from opposite sides of the camera to push the new medium from lowbrow entertainment into the realm of serious art. In 1920, under Griffith’s tutelage, Gish even directed her own film, Remodeling Her Husband, a vehicle for her sister. She left Griffith in 1923, landing at MGM to star in such literary projects as 1926’s La Boheme and The Scarlet Letter. In 1930, she made her first sound film, One Romantic Night. Longing to return to Broadway — and considered a fading star around Hollywood — she made only one film over the course of the next 13 years, 1933’s His Double Life. Instead, she became a fixture of the stage in productions, including 1930’s Uncle Vanya, 1936’s The Old Maid, and 1937’s The Star Wagon. She also played Ophelia opposite John Gielgud’s titular Hamlet, and in 1932 published the book Life and Lillian Gish.
A supporting role in 1943’s The Commandos Strike at Dawn signalled Gish’s return to film. Four years later, she received her first Oscar nomination for her work in the acclaimed Duel in the Sun. However, after 1948’s Portrait of Jennie, Gish again exited Hollywood for the stage, and did not return to movies prior to 1955’s The Cobweb. Later that same year, she also co-starred in Charles Laughton’s classic The Night of the Hunter and infrequently appeared on television. After 1967’s The Comedians, Gish largely retired from acting, penning a second memoir, The Movies, Mr. Griffith and Me, two years later. In 1971, she won a special Academy Award for her “superlative artistry” and in 1977 co-starred in Robert Altman’s A Wedding. After being honored in 1984 by the American Film Institute, in 1987, she accepted her final starring role, opposite Bette Davis, in The Whales of August. Lillian Gish died in New York City on February 27, 1993.
WHY ARE OLD FILMS BETTER THAN THE NEW ONES almost 4 years ago
Generation Entitlement, that’s my generation, doesn’t care or have time for greatness. They just want something fast and goofy, artistic but not great, hence why “El Topo” and Wes Anderson are so popular right now, and hardly anyone strives to be like Welles or Herzog. Also, my generation heavily favors gratuitous violence and pointlessly explicit sex in their films, because they think it is “edgy” and “real”—hence films like “Irreversible”. They don’t believe in the soul, therefore they don’t try to pander to anyone deep nor do they want to move anyone. They just want something that looks unique and quirky, has either dry, bloodless humor or something overly serious, dark, and senselessly graphic.
Also, film has been a self-destructive art since day one. Just look at Stroheim, battling the studio for his artistic vision, a fate that as befallen so many greats since him.
Go to Comment
WHY ARE OLD FILMS BETTER THAN THE NEW ONES almost 4 years ago
Generation Entitlement, that’s my generation, doesn’t care or have time for greatness. They just want something fast and goofy, artistic but not great, hence why “El Topo” and Wes Anderson are so popular right now, and hardly anyone strives to be like Welles or Herzog. Also, my generation heavily favors gratuitous violence and pointlessly explicit sex in their films, because they think it is “edgy” and “real”—hence films like “Irreversible”. They don’t believe in the soul, therefore they don’t try to pander to anyone deep nor do they want to move anyone. They just want something that looks unique and quirky, has either dry, bloodless humor or something overly serious, dark, and senselessly graphic.
Also, film has been a self-destructive art since day one. Just look at Stroheim, battling the studio for his artistic vision, a fate that as befallen so many greats since him.
Go to Comment
BERLIN ALEXANDERPLATZ over 3 years ago
Whoa, now…Strohiem failed because he was ahead of his time. “Greed” was TAKEN from him, butchered and left on the cutting room floor. Anyone who knocks Stroheim doesn’t know the whole story, Stroheim dreamed of the day when cinema could be seen in parts, he envisioned “Greed” this way, but the studios told him he was crazy and nobody would want to watch that.
“Greed” was 9.5 hours long originally. I’m sure if we could’ve seen the entire thing, it would’ve played out very similarly to “Alexanderplatz”!
Fassbinder’s work is what Stroheim dreamed of! I wonder if Fassbinder knew of his work, they were truly kindered spirits.
Go to Comment
BERGMAN vs WELLES about 3 years ago
Well, it seems Orson Welles and Ingmar Bergman weren’t fond of each other.
“For me he’s just a hoax. It’s empty. It’s not interesting. It’s dead. Citizen Kane, which I have a copy of – is all the critics’ darling, always at the top of every poll taken, but I think it’s a total bore. Above all, the performances are worthless. The amount of respect that movie’s got is absolutely unbelievable. Aghed: How about The Magnificent Ambersons? Bergman: Nah. Also terribly boring. And I’ve never liked Welles as an actor, because he’s not really an actor. In Hollywood you have two categories, you talk about actors and personalities. Welles was an enormous personality, but when he plays Othello, everything goes down the drain, you see, that’s when he’s croaks. In my eyes he’s an infinitely overrated filmmaker.”
—Bergman on Welles
“I don’t condemn that very northern, very Protestant world of artists like Bergman; it’s just not where I live. The Sweden I like to visit is a lot of fun. But Bergman’s Sweden always reminds me of something Henry James said about Ibsen’s Norway—that it was full of “the odor of spiritual paraffin.” How I sympathize with that! I share neither Bergman’s interests nor his obsessions. He’s far more foreign to me than the Japanese.”
—Orson Welles to Kenneth Tynan, 1967
Link: http://www.wellesnet.com/?p=432
Personally, I have to say I much prefer Welles’ films to Bergman’s. Welles’ style is just much more theatrical, iconic and epic, whereas Bergman is inward, overly self-critical and plodding. I respect his work as an artist, but for me, Welles’ creations are just much more alive and relevant, whereas some of Bergman’s films seem terribly dated and a bit pretentious.
Thoughts? There’s no right or wrong, I just like to hear other opinions.
Go to Comment
BERGMAN vs WELLES about 3 years ago
I was just wondering if anyone else would compare them, because I’ve personally always been much more attracted to Welles than Bergman. I was curious if anyone else had similar feelings, or if someone preferred Bergman to Welles.
Go to Comment
BERGMAN vs WELLES about 3 years ago
Well, no wonder why so many of his films strike me as one dimensional, if he was the spiteful male chauvinist (isn’t it so obvious in Persona???) this thread has informed me of.
Thanks guys, for giving me more reasons to dislike him.
Go to Comment
BERGMAN vs WELLES about 3 years ago
Ha, touché, Phantom :)
Go to Comment
BERGMAN vs WELLES about 3 years ago
Ah, I’m glad to see this topic get some life into! I love arguments, what can I say. It’s great to watch the great genesis duke it out against each other. We might just learn something in the process. I love hearing a good criticism as much as good defense.
But honestly, I never saw humanitarianism in Bergman. The films of his I’ve seen are so self-absorbed and dry, with maybe an exception for The Seventh Seal, which extends itself in allegory thankfully. I’m debating whether or not to watch Fanny and Alexander, since I found some of his other works a bit unfeeling and dull, is it worth it to try and watch such a huge chunk of time? Will I find it worth while?
Go to Comment
BERGMAN vs WELLES about 3 years ago
I’ve seen Persona, Winter Light, and The Seventh Seal. I enjoyed the latter, or at least found something of value in it, but the other two just really underwhelmed and even bothered me, really overrated although the cinematic craft was present. Maybe those you recommend are the better ones?
Go to Comment
BERGMAN vs WELLES about 3 years ago
Bergman criticized Htichcock as well?? With statements like that, he really does want me to hate him…
Well, I’ll give Fanny and Alexander a shot eventually. I found Winter Light to be horribly dated, a kind of one dimensional illustration on a three dimensional topic. Plus the entire thing was sluggish and almost had me asleep, on a topic I’m usually quite interested in. It takes a lot to almost bore me.
The Seventh Seal is classic, and while Bergman’s dry style still isn’t my taste, the story is a good one. I think his characters are very simple, hence allegory is good for him.
I’m glad to see no Welles haters here, thankfully. :) Yet, anyhow.
Go to Comment
BERGMAN vs WELLES about 3 years ago
“Though, personally, I see a few similarities in theme, especially in films such as The Trial, Citizen Kane, Mr. Arkadin, and Touch of Evil. But yeah, overall it seemed that Welles pretty much made whatever film project he had the time and money to make at that moment.
And there are more “distractions” (if one could call them that) in Welles’ work that could possibly detract from the impact of the storyline for some viewers."
Well, that’s what I like about Welles. The variation in his work is great. What distractions do you speak of?
Go to Comment
Film Database Submission April 2010 about 3 years ago
A Tale of Two Cities (1935)
Go to Comment
Film Database Submission April 2010 about 3 years ago
Boris Godunov (1954)
Go to Comment
Film Database Submission April 2010 about 3 years ago
The Scarlet Pimpernel (1934)
Go to Comment
Film Database Submission April 2010 about 3 years ago
The Wedding March (1928)
Go to Comment
Film Database Submission April 2010 about 3 years ago
The Thief and The Cobbler (workprint…never released offically)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thief_and_the_Cobbler
Go to Comment
Film Database Submission April 2010 about 3 years ago
Blind Husbands (1919)
Go to Comment
Film Database Submission April 2010 about 3 years ago
A Christmas Carol (1971)
Go to Comment
BETTER MOVIE STILLS FOR FILMS ON THE AUTEURS about 3 years ago
I’ve seen lots of films with bad stills here, like black and white production shots of color films, or films that could use better representative stills. Also, some films just have the wrong still altogether, from the wrong movies.
This thread we can fix them, post link to new stills for each film. If one already exists on this topic, please inform me…
Go to Comment
BETTER MOVIE STILLS FOR FILMS ON THE AUTEURS about 3 years ago
OK thanks!
Go to Comment
The Auteurs Film & Cast Member Database about 3 years ago
Profile picture for Richard Williams
Quote: “Sometimes the only thing that is as satisfying as doing the best work you can do, is to create an atmosphere where others can do the best work they can possibly do.”
Biography:
Involved in film animation from the young age of 12, Richard Williams’ international reputation as a true innovator grew so much that by 1990 he was voted “the Animator’s Animator” by a poll in the London Times, and a commentator for the New York Times has called Williams “miles ahead of anyone in the world of animation.” Williams’ work has spanned classic hand-animation style and incorporates contemporary computer animation methods.
In the late ’40s, Williams worked for both Disney and UPA studios, ultimately leaving for England in 1955 where he created his wonderful 33-minute animated film The Little Island (1958), which won the BAFTA Award for Best Animated Film in 1959. This piece gained him immediate recognition as a professional and highly talented animator.
This was followed with A Lecture on Man and Love Me Love Me Love Me in 1962, Circus Drawings (1964), Diary of a Madman (1965), The Dermis Probe (1966), and Nasrudin (1972). The made-for-TV version of A Christmas Carol (1971) won Williams his first Oscar. Williams worked on the unfortunately nearly forgotten film Raggedy Ann and Andy: A Musical Adventure (1977) which has some charming songs by Joe Raposo, as well as advanced animation and characters somewhat reminiscent of the Beatles’ Yellow Submarine (1968).
Williams has also designed and animated title sequences for several feature films, including the Blake Edwards/Peter Sellers vehicles Return of the Pink Panther (1974), The Pink Panther Strikes Again (1976), Woody Allen’s What’s New Pussycat? (1965) directed by Clive Donner, Casino Royale (1967), and linking sequences for The Charge of the Light Brigade (1968).
Williams is arguably best known as the director of animation and designer of the characters for Who Framed Roger Rabbit? (1988). For this project, Williams won two Academy Awards including a Special Achievement Award. Besides his three Oscars, Williams has received three British Academy Awards, an Emmy, and an astonishing 246 international awards.
In 1995 he offered the Richard Williams Animation Masterclasses for professionals and students which are conducted in London, Hollywood, New York, San Francisco, Vancouver, Sydney, Hong Kong, France, and Denmark. As an extension of his teaching, Williams has authored the acclaimed book The Animator’s Survival Kit (2001). Williams founded his own studio which continues to turn out animation films, as well as myriad prize-winning commercials. In 1995, Williams also animated, directed, and co-wrote the musical Arabian Knight with the voices of Vincent Price, Matthew Broderick, Eric Bogosian, and Jennifer Beal.
– allmovie guide.
Go to Comment
Film Database Submission April 2010 about 3 years ago
The Great Mouse Detective (1986)
Go to Comment
Film Database Submission April 2010 about 3 years ago
A Double Life (1947)
Go to Comment
Film Database Submission April 2010 about 3 years ago
The White Sister (1923)
Go to Comment
Film Database Submission April 2010 about 3 years ago
The Scarlet Letter (1926)
Go to Comment
The Auteurs Film & Cast Member Database about 3 years ago
Thanks for changing the Don Giovanni still, but some reason the smaller version doesn’t show up???
Go to Comment
The Auteurs Film & Cast Member Database about 3 years ago
Better still for Gigi
Go to Comment
Film Database Submission April 2010 about 3 years ago
Gösta Berlings Saga (1924)
Go to Comment
The Auteurs Film & Cast Member Database about 3 years ago
Information for Lillian Gish
Quote: “I never approved of talkies. Silent movies were well on their way to developing an entirely new art form. It was not just pantomine, but something wonderfully expressive.”
Bio:
“The First Lady of the Silent Screen,” Lillian Gish was the movie industry’s first true actress. A pioneer of fundamental film performing techniques, she was the first star to recognize the many crucial differences between acting for the stage and acting for the screen, and while her contemporaries painted their performances in broad, dramatic strokes, Gish delivered finely etched, nuanced turns carrying a stunning emotional impact. While by no means the biggest or most popular actress of the silent era, she was the most gifted, her seeming waiflike frailty masking unparalleled reserves of physical and spiritual strength. More than any other early star, she fought to earn film recognition as a true art form, and her achievements remain the standard against which those of all other actors are measured.
Born Lillian de Guiche October 14, 1893, in Springfield, OH, Gish, her younger sister, Dorothy, and their mother, actress Mary Gish, soon relocated to New York. Beginning their acting careers not long after, the girls were in short time the family breadwinners. Among their colleagues was another child actress, Mary Pickford, who in 1909 traveled west to Hollywood to pursue a career in the movies. She found work with the famed director D.W. Griffith, and soon persuaded him to recruit the Gish sisters for his Biograph Studios’ repertory company of actors. Lillian and Dorothy debuted together in 1912’s An Unseen Enemy and over the next several years appeared both together and independently in dozens of the director’s one- and two-reelers. While overshadowed by Pickford’s fame, Lillian was the Griffith stable’s most skilled actress, and she starred in many of his greatest works, including 1915’s The Birth of a Nation, 1916’s Intolerance, 1920’s Way Down East, and 1922’s Orphans of the Storm.
With her delicate, luminous beauty, Gish was perfect for Griffith’s Victorian-styled melodramas; wide-eyed and restrained, her face a marvel of innocence and nuance, she was nothing less than ideal for Griffith’s landmark use of close-up photography. Together, they worked from opposite sides of the camera to push the new medium from lowbrow entertainment into the realm of serious art. In 1920, under Griffith’s tutelage, Gish even directed her own film, Remodeling Her Husband, a vehicle for her sister. She left Griffith in 1923, landing at MGM to star in such literary projects as 1926’s La Boheme and The Scarlet Letter. In 1930, she made her first sound film, One Romantic Night. Longing to return to Broadway — and considered a fading star around Hollywood — she made only one film over the course of the next 13 years, 1933’s His Double Life. Instead, she became a fixture of the stage in productions, including 1930’s Uncle Vanya, 1936’s The Old Maid, and 1937’s The Star Wagon. She also played Ophelia opposite John Gielgud’s titular Hamlet, and in 1932 published the book Life and Lillian Gish.
A supporting role in 1943’s The Commandos Strike at Dawn signalled Gish’s return to film. Four years later, she received her first Oscar nomination for her work in the acclaimed Duel in the Sun. However, after 1948’s Portrait of Jennie, Gish again exited Hollywood for the stage, and did not return to movies prior to 1955’s The Cobweb. Later that same year, she also co-starred in Charles Laughton’s classic The Night of the Hunter and infrequently appeared on television. After 1967’s The Comedians, Gish largely retired from acting, penning a second memoir, The Movies, Mr. Griffith and Me, two years later. In 1971, she won a special Academy Award for her “superlative artistry” and in 1977 co-starred in Robert Altman’s A Wedding. After being honored in 1984 by the American Film Institute, in 1987, she accepted her final starring role, opposite Bette Davis, in The Whales of August. Lillian Gish died in New York City on February 27, 1993.
—allmovie guide.
Go to Comment
Film Database Submission April 2010 about 3 years ago
The Heron and the Crane (1974)
Go to Comment