670 To Be or Not to Be

Discuss releases by Criterion and the films on them. Threads may contain spoilers!
Message
Author
User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: To Be or Not to Be (Ernst Lubitsch, 1942)

#51 Post by domino harvey » Fri Feb 17, 2017 10:45 pm

I mentioned in the ballot thread that this has one of my favorite Lubitsch openings, but it is also a toss up between this and Ninotchka for my favorite Lubitsch ending (and if Lubitsch had been allowed to keep the titular ending to Heaven Can Wait, it would no doubt factor into the rankings as well)-- no one could end a movie on a bigger laugh or a funnier note than Lubitsch (when he wanted, at least-- not all of his endings land at the same level)

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Pinkus' Shoe Palace (Ernst Lubitsch, 1916)

#52 Post by Mr Sausage » Mon Jun 12, 2017 7:05 am

DISCUSSION ENDS MONDAY, June 26th

Members have a two week period in which to discuss the film before it's moved to its dedicated thread in The Criterion Collection subforum. Please read the Rules and Procedures.

This thread is not spoiler free. This is a discussion thread; you should expect plot points of the individual films under discussion to be discussed openly. See: spoiler rules.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

I encourage members to submit questions, either those designed to elicit discussion and point out interesting things to keep an eye on, or just something you want answered. This will be extremely helpful in getting discussion started. Starting is always the hardest part, all the more so if it's unguided. Questions can be submitted to me via PM.

User avatar
Tommaso
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 10:09 am

Re: Pinkus' Shoe Palace (Ernst Lubitsch, 1916)

#53 Post by Tommaso » Thu Jun 15, 2017 4:06 pm

As far as I can see, Schuhpalast Pinkus is the earliest surviving film of Lubitsch as a director (correct me if I'm wrong, because I'd LOVE to be wrong in this case) and the eighth one he made in this function, according to imdb. So it's not surprising that this is already a very convincing film, even though it is not yet as sophisticated as the outstanding films of his Berlin period he made in the years 1918/19.

But what we have here is a rather typical film for early Lubitsch, showing off his decidedly 'Jewish' persona in a way that if the film had been made twenty years later would have caused it to be banned nowadays for its seemingly antisemite clichés. Because Sally Pinkus is a lazy, sleepy boy who fails at school, and not just because he seems to be rather lecherously interested in any young girl who happens to come along his way... Later in the film, he also never seems to take any of his work seriously. However, and that's Lubitsch's great achievement, he manages to make his character quite endearing because of his clever and irreverent ways in which he manages to go from rags to riches.

There's also occasionally some really fine erotic/fetishistic innuendo, most of all when Sally Pinkus in one scene tickles a female customer's foot in a both ironical and at the same time sexual manner; he also 'reduces' the customer's shoe size to appeal to her vanity. And when he later plays a trick on his amorous boss by reminding him of his wife when he courts a customer lady, there is a sense of mischievousness which is rather typical for the film in general.

All in all, the film is quite 'cold' in the way it exposes the machinations of Pinkus to rise socially so that in the end he can open his own 'Shoe Palace' and be celebrated by society, all culminating in another somewhat fetishistic sequence, namely the "Stiefelschau" (boot display). And it's in these satirical, almost cynical moments where the film really shows Lubitsch's greatness.

Pinkus also seems to be somewhat related to an earlier film starring Lubitsch, namely Der Stolz der Firma (Carl Wilhelm, 1914), a film which I somewhat regard as the 'mother of all department store films'. There are some plot parallels, and probably it was this earlier film which led Lubitsch to devise his somewhat impish screen personality of the Sally/Meyer roles of later films. Here again he plays the 'dirty jew' who -according to one intertitle - only occasionally washes his hands but nevertheless manages to rise socially. The film ends with a brilliant 'before and after' shot of the 'two' Lubitsches of the film. Available on youtube here. The backchannels have it with English subs in addition. Do check this out if you can. Because it's the earlier film, it's even more seminal watching than Pinkus if you want to understand where Lubitsch came from, and I also think it's the (even) funnier film.

User avatar
Drucker
Your Future our Drucker
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 9:37 am

Re: Pinkus' Shoe Palace (Ernst Lubitsch, 1916)

#54 Post by Drucker » Sun Jun 18, 2017 10:26 pm

Great post Tommaso. I don't have much more to add, but seem to share your general sentiment that the film wasn't laugh out loud funny, but was brimming with personality. There are some great moments, like in the earliest scenes in the school, but as the story continues, the best parts of the film are really just Lubitsch winking at the camera. A nice film, but certainly not as good as I Don't Want to Be a Man or the fabulous Puppet a few short years later.

User avatar
aox
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:02 pm
Location: nYc

Re: 670 To Be or Not to Be

#55 Post by aox » Mon Jul 27, 2020 5:00 pm

I am finally caught up on this gem of a film, and instantly restarted it with the commentary. It's one of the best commentaries in the collection that I have heard. Endlessly fascinating. Kalat talks about Jack Benny being the precursor to comedians who couldn't act, using Seinfeld as his main example. Between 00:59:00-00:60:00, Kalat states that Lubitsch directed Benny the same way he directed all of his actors. By acting out their scenes for them before he shot them. Understandably, this gave Benny confidence to shoot each scene. That might be fine for Benny, but isn't that action one of the most egregious cardinal sins any film/TV (I don't know the theater world) director can make? Wouldn't this be insulting to every actor/actress to grace his set? Perhaps this was common during this era and fell out of fashion? It really stuck out to me.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: 670 To Be or Not to Be

#56 Post by domino harvey » Mon Jul 27, 2020 5:05 pm

They’re called line readings and some actors absolutely will not do them and some will— if either director or actor has strong feelings about them, it’d be a discussion before they sign on

User avatar
soundchaser
Leave Her to Beaver
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 12:32 am

Re: 670 To Be or Not to Be

#57 Post by soundchaser » Mon Jul 27, 2020 5:05 pm

Lubitsch apparently did it for most of his actors, if McBride’s book is anything to go by.

User avatar
aox
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:02 pm
Location: nYc

Re: 670 To Be or Not to Be

#58 Post by aox » Mon Jul 27, 2020 5:18 pm

domino harvey wrote:
Mon Jul 27, 2020 5:05 pm
They’re called line readings and some actors absolutely will not do them and some will— if either director or actor has strong feelings about them, it’d be a discussion before they sign on
Is that the same as a table reading where everyone sits around and reads the script? I get the impression from the commentary that it was literally Lubitsch acting out each part in the scene on set right before the take. It appears some actors even have a problem with table readings. Thanks for your input, as always.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: 670 To Be or Not to Be

#59 Post by domino harvey » Mon Jul 27, 2020 6:17 pm

Table readings are also called cold readings and it’s just a run through with cast, writers, producers, and the director to see what lands and what needs work before they start filming. They’re not directed, so not the same thing. Line readings are the director saying, “Do it like this” and then saying the line in a specific way while doing the action so the actor can then imitate the way they did it for the cameras

User avatar
Shrew
The Untamed One
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:22 am

Re: 670 To Be or Not to Be

#60 Post by Shrew » Mon Jul 27, 2020 6:45 pm

As soundchaser noted above, McBride's recent Lubitsch book gets more into this. It's true that many actors dislike directors giving them line readings, but I think that's because most directors deploy them when they're frustrated and aim them at specific actors. Lubitsch's approach was more that he acted out all the parts of all the scenes before shooting, and it helped that his thick accent made the exercise somewhat absurd. McBride notes that some actors took to it faster than others, but most thought it was funny.

The notoriously fussy Ed Norton gets a little into line readings on the Moonrise Kingdom commentary: he says that he found Wes Anderson's line readings useful, but thought Alejandro Inarritu's (with whom he would have just finished Birdman) line readings were not helpful (I think he uses some choicer words).

User avatar
The Fanciful Norwegian
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:24 pm
Location: Teegeeack

Re: 670 To Be or Not to Be

#61 Post by The Fanciful Norwegian » Mon Jul 27, 2020 7:00 pm

Polanski's another director who regularly gives line readings; there's a joke in Easy Riders, Raging Bulls that one observer of the Chinatown shoot half-expected Nicholson to start performing with a Polish accent. Nicholson was amused by his efforts but Faye Dunaway very much wasn't. The specificity of his readings was a major factor in John Travolta's withdrawal from an adaptation of The Double a few days before shooting was set to begin (though Travolta also cited a nude scene that had been added to the script).

Rupert Pupkin
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 9:34 am

Re: 670 To Be or Not to Be

#62 Post by Rupert Pupkin » Tue Feb 02, 2021 12:44 am

is "To Be or or Not to Be" out of print :? (I'm looking for the Criterion blu-ray) or is it just a temporary out-of-stock ? I've tried to order it at wowhd. I can't find it. And on amazon.com it's not sold anymore by amazon.com. ](*,)
I have "Godfrey.." "Cluny Brown"... It would be too sad if I miss this one. I've seen it Carole Lombard is amazing :oops: (and what a dress!); fucking "procrastination". I should have stayed out of the "To Buy or not To Buy".
or... George Harrison and his song "Try Some Buy Some" - just heard on radio (I live in a country called France) a journalist who wrote a book about Carole Lombard with some unexpected stories such as her wedding night with C.Gable and how she woke up during the wedding night, walked into the room naked to join her husband (they postponed the "wedding night" - somehow to speak) to walk and scream because she puts her foot on Clark Gable's dentale.

User avatar
fdm
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 1:25 pm

Re: 670 To Be or Not to Be

#63 Post by fdm » Tue Feb 02, 2021 8:19 am

Criterion has it available.

Rupert Pupkin
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 9:34 am

Re: 670 To Be or Not to Be

#64 Post by Rupert Pupkin » Tue Feb 02, 2021 9:42 pm

fdm wrote:
Tue Feb 02, 2021 8:19 am
Criterion has it available.
thanks [-o< :P

User avatar
Maltic
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2020 1:36 am

Re: 670 To Be or Not to Be

#65 Post by Maltic » Wed Feb 03, 2021 10:15 am

aox wrote:
Mon Jul 27, 2020 5:00 pm
I am finally caught up on this gem of a film, and instantly restarted it with the commentary. It's one of the best commentaries in the collection that I have heard. Endlessly fascinating. Kalat talks about Jack Benny being the precursor to comedians who couldn't act, using Seinfeld as his main example. Between 00:59:00-00:60:00, Kalat states that Lubitsch directed Benny the same way he directed all of his actors. By acting out their scenes for them before he shot them. Understandably, this gave Benny confidence to shoot each scene. That might be fine for Benny, but isn't that action one of the most egregious cardinal sins any film/TV (I don't know the theater world) director can make? Wouldn't this be insulting to every actor/actress to grace his set? Perhaps this was common during this era and fell out of fashion? It really stuck out to me.
I'm clearly in the minority here, but I'm not a huge fan of Kalat's commentary. It's obviously well-researched and well-constructed, but he tends to stray too far from what's on the screen for my liking. At a certain point after the hour-mark, he leaves the screen almost completely for 20-25 minutes, to talk about the Lend-Lease program, Lombard's efforts to sell war-bonds, followed by a mini-bio on Vincent Korda, then one on Bressart, then Tom Dugan, then Alex Korda. Which can all be interesting enough in a lecture or an article, but it defeats the purpose of a commentary track, in my opinion (the give-away is usually when the commentator speaks in the past tense for too long at a time)

Obviously, he does make interesting screen-relevant observations, fx during the great scene in which Siletsky meets Benny-as-Tura-as-Gestapo-chief. On Benny as a 1940s Seinfeld, Benny the ham playing a ham, the doubling with Tura, off stage, believing he's been shot, reacting theatrically, and Siletsky, on stage, *actually* getting shot, etc. (Kalat even leaves his script here, very briefly)

User avatar
stevewhamola
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2011 7:20 pm
Location: NWT, Canada

Re: 670 To Be or Not to Be

#66 Post by stevewhamola » Wed Feb 03, 2021 12:44 pm

Maltic wrote:
Wed Feb 03, 2021 10:15 am
I'm clearly in the minority here, but I'm not a huge fan of Kalat's commentary. It's obviously well-researched and well-constructed, but he tends to stray too far from what's on the screen for my liking.
I felt exactly the same way about his The Ring track, which was very much a primer to J-Horror more than it was a commentary to the film specifically. It's undoubtedly a top-flight track if taken on those terms but I wasn't nearly as wowed by it as I was by some of his other tracks (Godzilla / Godzilla: King of the Monsters comes immediately to mind).

User avatar
Maltic
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2020 1:36 am

Re: 670 To Be or Not to Be

#67 Post by Maltic » Wed Feb 03, 2021 1:38 pm

I've had different experiences with Kalat as well. The Scarlet Street track was right up my alley, the Sherlock Jr one not so much.

User avatar
JSC
Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 9:17 am

Re: 670 To Be or Not to Be

#68 Post by JSC » Wed Feb 03, 2021 3:32 pm

Kalat states that Lubitsch directed Benny the same way he directed all of his actors. By acting out their scenes for them before he shot them. Understandably, this gave Benny confidence to shoot each scene. That might be fine for Benny, but isn't that action one of the most egregious cardinal sins any film/TV (I don't know the theater world) director can make? Wouldn't this be insulting to every actor/actress to grace his set? Perhaps this was common during this era and fell out of fashion?
I think this might have been more of a common methodology of directors who cut their professional teeth during the silent era.
Both Chaplin and Keaton tended to direct their actors this way (with Chaplin, this was much to the chagrin of Marlon Brando. At
the same time, Claire Bloom writes about how Chaplin's own performances of all the characters was astounding to watch).
While I could see actors getting uptight with this kind of result direction, others might have welcomed it (at least as a framework
for their own performance). And anyway, Lubitsch got great performances out of his actors, so who's to say?

Post Reply