|
|
Post by marshamae on Mar 13, 2021 0:33:11 GMT
This is one of the films I discovered in Paris in the early 1970’s.
i was knocked back by James Dean. The film is centered around him in a way the book’ is not. It’s not just that he is the central character. The film is shaped around him, like those tunnels ,cut to fit a particular locomotive, or a frock coat , made to hang perfectly . Elia Kazan’s camera loved Dean, lingered on him, found perfect angles. This would be boring if Dean was not giving a bang up , all time brilliant performance. Even now , after many viewings I find him thrilling, so free and loose, so responsive.
the script is certainly shaped around Dean, every actor is responding to Dean, showing their character as Cal must see them. The book was exactly the opposite, exploring many points of view. In the novel Aron and Kate were the only characters that did not really express their point of view. Aron, in Steinbeck’s view was found to be shallow, and it’s a bit of a shock because he is presented as a prince . As the story goes on, Steinbeck finds him one dimensional and saves his praise for more flawed characters. The film makes Aron more rounded but retains the idea that his innocence is a little stunted. Kate did not express herself in the book because Steinbeck did not understand her and he said so. He intended her to be purely evil and a little inhuman, a real sociopath. Kazan decided to make her more realistic, a proto feminist refusing to be held at the ranch. It is more human but it clutters the story ark of Cal trying to understand what he is.
i really started this because I am so amazed at Raymond Massey. I have seen his famous evil films, Scarlet Pimpernel, Arsenic and Old Lace, and his Abe Lincoln’s. This is a different Raymond Massey. He is relaxed and natural, befuddled by his rampaging son, and growing delicately vaguer as he continues to have small strokes that bother his
eyes. It’s a wonderful performance that matches Dean so beautifully. I have read that they did not get along, and Kazan, ever the evil method genius, encouraged this, feeling that some real enmity and misunderstanding would be good for the film.
i
I would love to hear any thoughts.
|
|
|
|
Post by spiderwort on Mar 13, 2021 1:48:09 GMT
Oh, marsha, thanks for this post! Love your comments. East of Eden is one of my most beloved Kazan films! I happen also to love Steinbeck's novel, deeply. Of course, it's much longer, spanning from the 1800s into the 20th century and World War I. But I think Kazan and his screenwriter, Paul Osborn, were right to limit the film to the last quarter of the novel. It enabled them to really develop the Cain and Abel story. I had the good fortune to see the film for the first time on the big screen in 1965, ten years after its release, and it literally took my breath away. Dean's performance was absolutely mesmerizing, painfully beautiful, at times transcendent. I loved Massey, too, and Julie Harris, of course, to say nothing of Jo Van Fleet. Great performances all the way 'round, thanks to Kazan's incomparable direction. Another of his films where his skill with actors was perfectly manifest. I also loved the great cinemascope cinematography. It was one of the first non-epic films shot in the relatively new anamorphic format, and unlike many other films at the time, it used that format in an incredibly powerful way to tell a conventional, non-epic story. Great angles, some canted, with lots of shadows and foreground objects galore. A real masterwork in that regard. Also loved the music, written by Leonard Rosenman at the age of 24. He was a friend of Dean's, who introduced him to Kazan. I loved the dissonance of it, and its virtually non-stop operatic qualities that would suddenly merge into one of the most beautiful lyrical melodies I've ever heard, one that I cherish to this day. And I loved that they shot a lot of it on location, in Mendocino, Salinas, and Monterey, California. That added a verisimilitude I really appreciated, and I'm sure it made Steinbeck very happy. Also, when they weren't on the soundstages at Warner Brothers, they shot on Warners' "Midwest Street" backlot, which to this day is a perfect rendering of that place and time. Definitely a film to be viewed and re-viewed, in my opinion. Kazan, Dean, and Osborn were all nominated for Oscars, and Jo Van Fleet won. (Two side-notes: I lived for awhile in Pacific Grove, Ca., next to Monterey, and often drove back and forth to L.A. for work. But one time I decided to take the train instead, and I was thrilled that I did, because I was able to see the Hamilton farmhouse in the Salinas valley along the way. Because you've read the novel, you will know what that means. For those who don't: the Hamiltons were Steinbeck's maternal grandparents, and they are interwoven in the novel as background characters in the Trask family story. But, Marsha, it may surprise you to know something I know only because I read all of the nearly 900 pages of "Steinbeck: A Life in Letters": When Steinbeck began writing the novel he meant for it to be a family history for his two sons, with the Hamilton family the main story, interwoven with the Trask family as background characters. About 400 pages into his first draft, however, he realized that the Trask family was the real heart of the story. So he started over and made them the main characters and set the Hamiltons in the background. 400 pages and a year or so later. Now that's a writer, and an artist!!)
P.S. Lucky you. Paris in the 1970s!
|
|
|
|
Post by petrolino on Mar 13, 2021 1:50:53 GMT
If you sit me down in front of this movie, I'll be gripped within seconds. The same goes for other films Elia Kazan made around this time, and by time, I mean a significant chunk of film history, the 1940s to the 1970s. James Dean's electrifying. Everybody cites Marlon Brando and rightly so, but it was a certain kind of actor I looked up to that brought up Dean when I was a kid - Al Pacino, Martin Sheen, Richard Dreyfuss, Harvey Keitel, John Savage - those guys that were charismatic but slightly awkward too, not the buff bohunks of Brando's chiselled paradise.
|
|
|
|
Post by OldAussie on Mar 13, 2021 2:55:55 GMT
In my youth this was my least favourite of the 3 Deans - now, older and wiser (?) it is a clear number ONE.
Everything is perfect - but the main thing I've grown to appreciate is the masterful use of the widescreen cinematography. Cinemascope in its early years often appears awkward but here it never intrudes in the highly personal story being portrayed.
Should have won several more oscars.
|
|
|
|
Post by bravomailer on Mar 13, 2021 3:18:47 GMT
This is the only James Dean film I'd watch again.
I always wondered why Richard Davolos didn't become more prominent.
As I recall Tim Carey's voice is obviously dubbed over.
|
|
|
|
Post by marshamae on Mar 13, 2021 5:05:31 GMT
I wonder about Dick Davalos too. He certainly gave a fine performance . His last scene was hair raising .Who Could doubt he was going to his death. It was ultimately a thankless role, conceived as a cardboard perfect boy, and then set down in a film entirely crafted to show Dean. It is the most thankless role since Cagney’s brother in Public Enemy, and that guy was happy ro relinquish the part of Tom as too negative. Imagine not see8ng that Tom was the role and that Cagney was glowing hot and would walk off with the picture.
Davalos probably did know that Dean was in his moment and Cal was The role. Who coukd 8magine he would not. Get another bite at the Apple.
|
|
|
|
Post by bravomailer on Mar 13, 2021 5:12:03 GMT
I wonder about Dick Davalos too. He certainly gave a fine performance . His last scene was hair raising .Who Could doubt he was going to his death. It was ultimately a thankless role, conceived as a cardboard perfect boy, and then set down in a film entirely crafted to show Dean. It is the most thankless role since Cagney’s brother in Public Enemy, and that guy was happy ro relinquish the part of Tom as too negative. Imagine not see8ng that Tom was the role and that Cagney was glowing hot and would walk off with the picture. Davalos probably did know that Dean was in his moment and Cal was The role. Who coukd 8magine he would not. Get another bite at the Apple. Good points. In this (inverted) retelling of the Biblical story, Cain gets more plaudits than Abel. The only role he had after that I can think of offhand was one of the inmates in Cool Hand Luke - paradoxical as so many of the others became well known. His granddaughter Alexa was one of the principals in The Man In The High Castle.
|
|
|
|
Post by marshamae on Mar 13, 2021 5:17:12 GMT
Spider you are always so kind. The novel is a huge favorite. I really forgive the film for not being a great transfer of a literary work by choosing to see it as a separate work. It works perfectly within its own world, on its own terms, psycho babble and all. I adore the Hamilton parts of the book, and the character of Lee.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rufus-T on Mar 13, 2021 6:01:34 GMT
The only adaptation I knew of the book before the mid '00s was the mini-series starring Jane Seymour. This movie blew that mini-series out of the water. It was James Dean show, but I like how Elia Kazan handled the story.
Every time I watched one of James Dean three major movies, I kept thinking of what could have been.
|
|
|
|
Post by spiderwort on Mar 13, 2021 18:48:07 GMT
Spider you are always so kind. The novel is a huge favorite. I really forgive the film for not being a great transfer of a literary work by choosing to see it as a separate work. It works perfectly within its own world, on its own terms, psycho babble and all. I adore the Hamilton parts of the book, and the character of Lee. I'm so glad you love the novel, too, marsha. And I agree completely with you about the film being a stand-alone work. But Lee, that character, oh, I loved him! Maybe the only thing from the novel that I missed in the film, though, of course, having him as a character wasn't appropriate. OMG, now I'm remembering that when I was in high school I wrote a 10 minute stage adaptation of the novel which featured Lee in his struggle with the accurate interpretation of the Bible! "Timshel." Remember Timshel? Not thou will, but thou mayest rule over sin. Man has a choice, in other words, which is incorporated in the film in a couple of scenes with Cal and his father. I'd forgotten all about that script I wrote what seems like a century ago, and I have no idea where it is now; lost in the wilderness of time, I'm sure. But, oh, I wish I still had it. And now you've got me wanting to read the novel again. All 500 plus pages of it. Oh boy. . .What a day. . .
|
|
|
|
Post by mattgarth on Mar 13, 2021 20:45:54 GMT
Great thread here from all sides.
A piece of casting trivia. A then-young Lois Smith (she plays the worker at Kate's joint) was in the running for the role of Abra. But the suits at Warners were leery about having two unknowns in lead roles, and went with the more familiar Julie Harris (who was still fine as usual but did seem older than Dean).
Lois as she got older became a successful character actress (she portrayed 'Ma Joad' on Broadway in the musical version of GRAPES OF WRATH).
But can't help wondering what her career arc might have been had she gotten the EDEN role.
|
|
|
|
Post by marshamae on Mar 13, 2021 21:03:41 GMT
I noticed her specially last night. She was much more beautiful than I remembered. She had a tremendous bit, much more interaction with Dean than I remembered and she underscored how attractive Dean was. A show business career is all about the part not taken, the film that got away. Ryan Oneal wrecked his career by, among other things, complaining , really whining anbout films in which he was not cast. It seems like the healthiest people don’t dwell on whatever unfair thing was done .
Lois had a nice career but I wish we had more of her work on film.
|
|
|
|
Post by bravomailer on Mar 13, 2021 23:55:28 GMT
Lois Smith played Jack Nicholson's more musically disciplined sister, Partita, in Five Easy Pieces.  |
|
|
|
Post by OldAussie on Mar 14, 2021 0:10:12 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by petrolino on Mar 20, 2021 2:18:42 GMT
In the U K press, they are rightly celebrating the rise of actor Daniel Kaluuya who's just been Oscar-nominated. I noticed some prominent English film critics saying his greatest quality is an unpredictable element to his on-screen personality and character, a mischievous spark and inherent sense of danger; for which he's been compared in a cinematic petty-criminal sense to James Dean in 'Rebel Without A Cause', Jack Nicholson in 'Five Easy Pieces', Malcolm McDowell in 'A Clockwork Orange', Martin Sheen in 'Badlands', Al Pacino in 'Dog Day Afternoon', Christian Slater in 'True Romance' ... and this is an element to Dean's on-screen persona I feel I get every time I see him in action.
The way William Wellman moved the camera around in such a unique and unconventional manner, Dean would either have been his perfect stock company performer, or his worst nightmare.
|
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Mar 20, 2021 6:52:53 GMT
I really wish other parts of the board where this detailed with reviews like film general...
|
|
|
|
Post by spiderwort on Mar 20, 2021 14:50:14 GMT
The way William Wellman moved the camera around in such a unique and unconventional manner, Dean would either have been his perfect stock company performer, or his worst nightmare.
Hey, Petrolino, I think you mean Elia Kazan instead of Wellman. Nevertheless, I think you're right in your assessment of Dean. I once worked with the boom man (microphone holder) on EDEN, and he told me a great story about when they shot the scene where Cal tries to give his father his birthday present. Things weren't going that well for Dean in rehearsal, so Kazan dismissed the cast and the crew and worked alone with Dean for about an hour (Ivor Francis once told me that Kazan did the same thing on SPLENDOR IN THE GRASS with him and Natalie Wood). Anyway, when he brought everybody back to the set he told the boom man and cameraman to follow Dean wherever he went, because Kazan wasn't sure how things would unfold. A great lesson in directing in my opinion, controlling by inspiring, then letting go. But I do think Dean was a bit indulgent at times. Jim Backus once told me that on REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE, after a shot was blocked, Dean would often follow the camera assistant and step on his fingers as he put the marks down. Not acceptable behavior, in my opinion. But Nicholas Ray indulged Dean. Kazan would never have permitted such a thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by petrolino on Mar 20, 2021 15:29:39 GMT
The way William Wellman moved the camera around in such a unique and unconventional manner, Dean would either have been his perfect stock company performer, or his worst nightmare.
Hey, Petrolino, I think you mean Elia Kazan instead of Wellman. Nevertheless, I think you're right in your assessment of Dean. I once worked with the boom man (microphone holder) on EDEN, and he told me a great story about when they shot the scene where Cal tries to give his father his birthday present. Things weren't going that well for Dean in rehearsal, so Kazan dismissed the cast and the crew and worked alone with Dean for about an hour (Ivor Francis once told me that Kazan did the same thing on SPLENDOR IN THE GRASS with him and Natalie Wood). Anyway, when he brought everybody back to the set he told the boom man and cameraman to follow Dean wherever he went, because Kazan wasn't sure how things would unfold. A great lesson in directing in my opinion, controlling by inspiring, then letting go. But I do think Dean was a bit indulgent at times. Jim Backus once told me that on REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE, after a shot was blocked, Dean would often follow the camera assistant and step on his fingers as he put the marks down. Not acceptable behavior, in my opinion. But Nicholas Ray indulged Dean. Kazan would never have permitted such a thing.
Hi spiderwort. I was actually projecting (fantasising) in the sense that James Dean's forward-thinking style might have been an interesting fit for William Wellman's unusual camera placements and set-ups. It's just a shame they never got to work together. I'd have liked to see James Dean work with a number of different directors.
|
|
|
|
Post by timshelboy on Mar 20, 2021 17:02:05 GMT
Lois Smith played Jack Nicholson's more musically disciplined sister, Partita, in Five Easy Pieces. She had a juicy role a couple of years back in MARJORIE PRIME, an offbeat low key, rather creepy scifi about replacing loved ones with cyber versions of them after death. Worth a look, but obvs its a downer - keep ON THE TOWN or somesuch on standby for if you need a swift "up" afterwards...  With Tim Robbins, Geena Davis and Jon Hamm.  Here it is ok.ru/video/758126479927and here she is with Dean in 1955, a full 62 years before. The novel is, give or take THE BELL JAR, probably my favourite novel and I read it every few years. The film, which I still rate highly, seemed to mean much more when I was a teenager... but I should give it another go soon.  Oh and it is the source for my board identity - Timshel is the Hebrew word (in the book anyway) meaning - "thou mayest" (not "thou must") - the distinction between these two translations of its meaning encapsulating the books central theme of free will and having a choice/being responsible for our actions. I'd given the novel to a friend who then helped me establish my first email account around 2004 and Timshel seemed like a good choice of name - we had been discussing it that day. I carried the name over to the few social media identities I possess. Here's the section of the novel explaining it better than I can (Adam) "Why is this word so important?”
Lee’s hand shook as he filled the delicate cups. He drank his down in one gulp. “Don’t you see?” he cried. “The American Standard translation orders men to triumph over sin, and you can call sin ignorance. The King James translation makes a promise in ‘Thou shalt,’ meaning that men will surely triumph over sin.
But the [original] Hebrew word, the word timshel-’Thou mayest’- that gives a choice. It might be the most important word in the world. That says the way is open. That throws it right back on a man.
For if ‘Thou mayest’-it is also true that ‘Thou mayest not.’ Don’t you see?”
“Yes, I see. I do see. But you do not believe this is divine law. Why do you feel its importance?”
“Ah!” said Lee. “I’ve wanted to tell you this for a long time. I even anticipated your questions and I am well prepared. Any writing which has influenced the thinking and the lives of innumerable people is important. Now, there are many millions in their sects and churches who feel the order, ‘Do thou,’ and throw their weight into obedience. And there are millions more who feel predestination in ‘Thou shalt.’ Nothing they may do can interfere with what will be. But ‘Thou mayest’! Why, that makes a man great, that gives him stature with the gods, for in his weakness and his filth and his murder of his brother he has still the great choice. He can choose his course and fight it through and win.” Lee’s voice was a chant of triumph.
Adam said, “Do you believe that, Lee?”
“Yes, I do. Yes, I do. It is easy out of laziness, out of weakness, to throw oneself into the lap of deity, saying, ‘I couldn’t help it; the way was set.’ But think of the glory of the choice! That makes a man a man. A cat has no choice, a bee must make honey. There’s no godliness there. And do you know, those old gentlemen who were sliding gently down to death are too interested to die now?”
Adam said, “Do you mean these Chinese men believe the Old Testament?”
Lee said, “These old men believe a true story, and they know a true story when they hear it. They are critics of truth. They know that these sixteen verses are a history of humankind in any age or culture or race. They do not believe a man writes fifteen and three-quarter verses of truth and tells a lie with one verb. Confucius tells men how they should live to have good and successful lives. But this-this is a ladder to climb to the stars.” Lee’s eyes shone. “You can never lose that. It cuts the feet from under weakness and cowardliness and laziness.”
Adam said, “I don’t see how you could cook and raise the boys and take care of me and still do all this.”
“Neither do I,” said Lee. “But I take my two pipes in the afternoon, no more and no less, like the elders. And I feel that I am a man. And I feel that a man is a very important thing-maybe more important than a star. This is not theology. I have no bent toward gods. But I have a new love for that glittering instrument, the human soul. It is a lovely and unique thing in the universe. It is always attacked and never destroyed- because “Thou mayest.’”
|
|
|
|
Post by spiderwort on Mar 20, 2021 17:14:15 GMT
Hi spiderwort. I was actually projecting (fantasising) in the sense that James Dean's forward-thinking style might have been an interesting fit for William Wellman's unusual camera placements and set-ups. It's just a shame they never got to work together. I'd have liked to see James Dean work with a number of different directors.
Oh, yes, I see now, petrolino. Sorry about that. And I, too, would have loved to see Dean work with many different directors. It would have been wonderful if he had a long, productive life. Wonderful for him and for all of us.
|
|
