|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
Poirot ?
Not Sir Ustinov nor Suchet David...
Follow Ups:
He has the manners, doesn´t he?But it seems we need " a small, egg-headed man, with thin hands, a ridiculous moustache, and a decent-sized belly, while himself not being fat, in his fifties, or early sixties".
Regards
I would have the perfect " Poirot " I think...Remember the film " The Chariots of Fire "
There is there is this small actor who plays the part of the trainer...I write Ian Holm,
he would be the right one!
Between Ian Holm and Fernandel - I know whom I would want to spend the evening watching!Do you remember El Amor de Don Juan? See my nomination for the actor you didn't expect to fit... he-he... and another he-he...
No I don´t, but I bought not too long ago " L´Auberge *" maybe his best film.
And NO, Ian would be the perfect match.
You mean L'Auberge Rouge? No, don't recall seeing it, and fat chance finding it here in the US, I am afraid.Fernandel is not nearly as popular as Tom Cruise, you know. :-((
Yes, with " la Vache est le Prisonnier " his best works..and of course the " Don camillo "
You can find all of them on Amazon fr.
Are you trying to get me into finally buying the multi-system DVD player? I am still resisting.Also, do those come with subtitles, or only that horrible tortured original language, that is neither Russian nor English? :-)
And, BTW - they just brought in The Earings of Madame De... from Amazon.
So tonight is all set.
No, no under titles!
The new " Dom Camillo* " on Amazon.de has only German titles
* five films
You still have not?????
But you could make your one " code free " easy and very expensive!
In Germany and France they almost only sell them so.
You have from case to case look at the technicla details, I will have a look on the Fernandel but I think they do NOT come with under titles...
Time to learn French.
100 years ago, borne noble you would have.....
Bon appetit with Madame.....
But of course it's been decades since I read those books, so don't take my pick too seriously... I know you would not anyway.However, the beauty of putting known text on movie screen is that you are often in for some surprises.
So perhaps a corolary question would be: which actor, who initially struck you as a bad fit, made you change your mind after seeing his work?
NT
seeing his work.That is one of the very good and hard question seldom posed.
I, like most of us has a certain idea who could fit in a particular role, take as an exemple who would have fit in..say, James Bond...we did not knew at the time Sean Connery...should it have been David Niven ?
No way back, now but at the time we may have been deceived with the choice of a working class nobody. It would have been so much easyer to respond to " as a bad fit, and did NOT make you change your mind! But it was never really easy to discuss easy issue with our friend Victor! I do not want to topsy-survy his question any longer so here is my answer....In not particulary order of course!
-A Bout de Souffle: Jean-Luc Godard choice of Belmondo, I would never had then nor today, but he was a perfect match ( Think of what Richard did! But so lovely Valerie..)
-Jules et Jim: Oscar Werner, the German actor was first a curious choice in my mind but it did work 100% thanks to the Great Francois.
-Barry Lyndon: My GOD Ryan 0`Neal, NO....but there too he did work out fine...
-Wild Strawberries: I wanted Max von Sydow...I got Victor ( ! ) Sjöström who was the perfect match.Only a few in so many, but nothing more comes to my mind right now...But as we are more than one on this board..keeps them rolling.....
Except, I want to change the category.I thought he was gonna surprise me, when Kubrick selected him... expecting another Ryan... so I was really looking forward... only to be grossly disappointed. Not in Tom, mind you, but in old man Stanley.
Talk about shattered hopes!
I did not like the film anyway a kind of intellectual " Story of O "
This film grows on you over time. The DVD is not in the correct aspect ratio but serviceable. The colors just POP out at you. YOu may have seen it at its release when all the hooppla over it ands Kubrick's death may have made everyone expect more. Certainly not his greatest but still very well done.
No one dispute that it was well done!
But it is not my cup of tea.
Maybe it would make some sense in 1960, but not any later. I was shocked the master took that idiotic story - it was like he was reliving his puberty.
A Spanish actor, who has played at ninety-something movies, most of them extremely bad, with him acting as a cheap Spanish Donjuan to foreign girls (mainly French, and Swedish), and in many bad taste pictures of similar concern, so much that I never thought of him as an actor... until the day he came to the screen in "El Crack", playing a very credible detective, and then "Los Santos Inocentes", and my God, what a change!: he played an incredibly difficult role as a peasant, a serf to a bastard of a landowner, with exquisite sensitivity, giving the right measure, never overacting, never short..., simply superb! That dwarf became a true giant, and that film could never be so good with any other actor.Later to that, he has done some other good ones, just to prove it was not pure chance: look at his filmography, and try to find "Los Santos Inocentes", "El Bosque Animado", "El Rio que nos lleva", and then, just to check the change, any of his shitty 60 first pictures...
Regards
BF
I had prefered an international star ( or do they call them ) as Mr.Landa is not on the Amazon map....
Try harder.
You know, he's got so much charm that somehow he didn't seem out of place... and of course you are forgetting Bondarchuk as Pierre.
With Fernandel no way...hehe...
Good question.
I will have to think a little longer at this one...So you go to " La Ronde " and I to " With a litlle bit of luck"....
And tomorrow I will answer...
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: