Tuesday, January 16, 2007

The Maltese Falcon (or, First, first, first!)


I caught The Maltese Falcon at acmi the other day. Richard has taken it upon himself to accompany on a brisk walk through early noir cinema. It all started with Double Indemnity a few weeks ago and it looks like it is going to continue very soon with To Have and Have Not.

Anyway. Loved The Maltese Falcon. Loved the creeping menace of the film. Loved the dialogue, especially Bogart's final speech. Loved Peter Lorre's gayer than gay character (as highlighted in The Celluloid Closet).

It is easy to see why it is considered a classic and championed as the beginnings of noir. Though it was a shame that the print acmi is showing is rather decrepit.

I don't suppose I can lay claim to not having seen a Bogart film any more. Or a Huston film. I can only consider that a good thing.

Labels: , , , ,

6 Comments:

At 3:20 pm, Blogger richardwatts said...

To Have and Have Not isn't actually noir, although it's a Bogey classic. How about for your next film noir installment we watch Orson Welles' Touch of Evil?

 
At 3:24 pm, Blogger walypala said...

Aha! That one I have already seen. Saw it over at the Astor a couple of years back.

Chuck Heston is has the acting ability of a lump of pine. And about as much charisma.

Good movie though. Love those CRAZY drug addicts.

 
At 4:55 pm, Blogger richardwatts said...

No worries, there's plenty of others. :-)

And you're right, Heston is fairly lifeless - and the fact that his character is supposed to be Mexican is just ludicrous - but how good is the sound design in the final sequence? And ohhhh, the lighting, the cinematography, the direction...

 
At 9:18 am, Blogger cloudcontrol said...

Wow that's so great that you're exploring old cinema. Although it's more about genre than period, isn't it?

I've been meaning to make some time and watch every Hitchcock film, and re-acquaint myself with being comfortable with black and white films.

Just curious, Bound? Office Killer? Do these count as noir?

 
At 10:17 am, Blogger richardwatts said...

Billy - Bound is definitely a superb example of neo-noir, yes. I haven't seen Office Killer though I'm sorry, so I can't really say.

 
At 11:15 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In my opinion 'Office killer' does not classify as a neo-noir, try 'The Last Seduction' or 'Burnt Money' instead for some great neo-noir

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Saturday, December 16, 2006

Eyes, Lies and Illusions @ ACMI


After such praise from Richard, and having an afternoon dangling, I visited ACMI for their latest exhibition. Eyes, Lies and Illusions promised to deliver a cavalcade of mind-bending illusions from the pre-cinematic age. And it did, but I’d seen most of it before so I left feeling less than whelmed.

It is a clever little exhibition, well curated, quirkily set out, but it is much more hands off than it needed to be. Part of the fun of these illusions it their ability to animate with the tug of a string or the flick of a finger and the countless “hands off” signs made it abundantly clear that the powers that be weren’t very amenable to that.

What does manage to shine through from behind the Perspex is the ingenuity of the human mind when it comes to creating diversions and the charming naivity of the human mind for being diverted so fully by such things.

Check it out but try to sneak in because it isn’t really worth the entry fee – you’re not living in the 18th century, you’re not going to be stunned.

Labels: , , ,

2 Comments:

At 11:46 pm, Blogger richardwatts said...

Cynic. I actually paid to get into this exhibition, which is rare for me, and I still enjoyed it, so there. *pokes out tongue and runs away giggling*

 
At 11:52 pm, Blogger walypala said...

Oh, come now, you can't call me a cynic just because I didn't like the exhibition.

I agree that some of the modern pieces were a bit spesh. I particularly liked the pile of rubbish that inverted.

On the whole though, I found it far too standoffish.

Then, I was in a bad mood.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home