oldguybc

Wow... another "FURY" and "TRY & GET ME"... people have been trying to make something out of this story for years... I know three people who were there and witnessed the whole thing... this is the 3rd or 4th movie that has been made of this incident, plus at least three books written about it that I know of. Robert Conot, the guy who wrote "Judgement at Nuremberg" did a semi-fictional account of the Harts kidnapping & lynching called "Ministers of Vengeance" that never went anywhere. There are some that say the family paid a lot of bucks so that it wouldn't go anywhere, probably due to Conot's portrayal of the family members (think Peyton Place) but you'd have to ask someone from L Hart & Son, Inc. about that & I doubt you'd ever get an answer. What I am sure of is this... that "4 guys in a car" theory is absolute bullshit! They had nothing to do with the facts of the case, that has been proved, but some dingbat reporter got hold of that story and tried to make something out of it. Read the HarryFarrell book, "Swift Justice" too, it was somewhat accurate but still only got about half of the facts straight. One of my friends 95 years young & sharp as a tack, was a student at Santa Clara during this time.Some guy got up at a rally, a friend or roommate of Brooke Hart,he believes, and just incited the crowd of 700 to 1000 students to an absolute frenzy while the Jesuit brothers all stood in back smiling with their arms folded, nodding in approval as the screams of the mob echoed for miles... "KILL THEM! LYNCH THE MURDERERS!" TheCalifornia national guard regiment barracked at the Presidio in SF, or state militia as it was known back then, was dispatched that morning from San Francisco but took a 6- hour coffee break at Murphy's Corners (Sunnyvale today) and didn't arrive until the wee small hours of the next morning, by then Thurmond had been cut down & re- hung inside the building... he had to be taken back outside & re- strung so the newspapers could get all the pictures. My friend says he was one of over 6,000 men is attendance, by his count. He said it took his mother a month to wash the tear gas & smoky smell off his clothes. Josef Goebbels used the film and pictures shot that day in his anti-American spiel.

First saw this movie in a top run theater in downtown Seattle in 1966 and, although long enough to warrant two (2!) intermissions, it was well worth the over three hour length. Have never seen a more gripping end to any movie in my life. Curious about a couple of awards... there is no mention of either Richard Crenna or Richard Attenborough, didn't they win Oscars for their performances, or were at least nominated? Seems to me they did... do not remember Mako even being nominated, although he certainly well deserved a nomination. Have this movie on DVD now & watched it just the other night, still good although not as good as in wide screen theater, especially the scenes of the gunboat on the river and the unforgettable final shootout at the mission (fort?). The movie actually covers a period in American military history that certain people would like to forget, that of imperialistic power plays brought about by a philosophy of "keeping up with the British, French & Spanish in the far east", a lot of the older Chinese still remember this period with great disdain. Steve McQueen's best & greatest role, without a doubt... Richard Crenna, Richard Attenborough and Candace Bergen were also fantastic and the story line was both believable and attention riveting. Movies with engine room scenes like this one along with "The Enemy Below", "Das Boot", "Tora Tora Tora", even "Titanic" have a certain fascination with an audience that allows them sometimes to be longer than usual. In conclusion I believe this movie should rate higher than the 7.5 given it by IMDb,

This is a one-of-a-kind thing, a sight gag gone berserk. Loved Tim Conway for years in McHale & with Carol B, Harvey & Vicki, this is like the icing on the cake. If for anything just to bring him together with the late Vincent Schiavelli for this short little ditty which did as much for golf pros of America as anything with the possible exception of Tiger (golf instruction increased a whopping 17% within three months of the release of this video, but the following is probably one of the all- time best rim shots... "Leonard, why don't you consider getting to bed a little early tonight? You wouldn't want to miss a visit from the IQ fairy."

I think whoever tried to interpret this into a screenplay did just a marginally adequate job, even though Dean Koontz is credited as a "co- producer" it is obvious that he had had little say- so in the actual production. The sad part was the attempt to remain true to the story line which was accomplished after a fashion but, sadly at the expense of remaining true to Dean's character development and overall story concept. Casting was adequate but not brilliant. Billy Zane did a fair job at best, while John C. McGinley's portrayal of Yates, which was so very good at first, kind of fell apart at the end as anyone who read the book can see. Both Watchers and Hideaway were disappointing as well, would like to see Life Expectancy but believe the story line would be far too difficult.

Wayne had more than a little say- so in the movie casting, he knew he had a great part and wanted the movie to go as well as it could, don't know if he was instrumental in the casting of Glen Campbell but kind of doubt it, he was known to have issues with Hathaway and the producers on more than one role. He probably argued for Duvall and Martin and some of the others but the backing money made the decisions on using Campbell and Kim Darby who were both hot commodities about that time. One interesting note, Bing Russell, Kurt's daddy, was strongly considered for the La Boeuf role and probably supported by Duke who had known him and liked his ability, I think he had been in a movie with Duke's son Patrick earlier. Hathaway probably had more of a say- so in the casting and believed that the story line was just a little weak and that Wayne had a strong- enough role to warrant merit but that Campbell and Darby would result in a bigger box- office draw. Remember that Hawkses' "Rio Bravo" was (and still is, for that matter) one of the biggest box- office draws of all time and perhaps the biggest western grosser despite the worst acting job ever, using Ricky Nelson, who played Ozzie's son with six- guns, wisecracks and all. Dean Martin's portrayal of a reformed drunk lawman was one of the best of that movie, in some ways he actually played himself. True Grit drags more than a little during the first half hour of the movie but really picks up towards the end.

Just watched it again for the 5th or 6th time... first time was in atheater when it first came out... had a mouthful of popcorn when RowanAtkinson gave out with his "holy spigot!" line. My wife nearly had to"Heimlich" me, still cough out of remembrance every time thatparticular scene comes on..In reading comments before me I agree that the acting ranged frombarely adequate (Andie- baby) to absolutely brilliant (just abouteveryone else)... uncannily, have known people just like some of thesein the movie.This was a very entertaining movie to watch, had just the right blendof British humor, Ike...Lady at wedding: Do you really know Oscar Wilde? Gareth: No, but I canget his fax number for you!You'd have to be British to get that...

Saw it last night with my wife at a local theatre, theatre was crowded, being Saturday night. Thoroughly enjoyed movie, loved surrealistic theme and interaction with young BD. Music was excellent, Spacey sounds so very much like BD, maybe better in some cases. Only wish that more of movie had had to do with his other talents, piano (he had a top- 10 solo piano hit in 1960, forget the song's name), guitar (saw him at Lake Tahoe in 1973, phenomenal guitar player), Cornet (used to include solos in all his shows), drums (would also do solos, said to be better than his own drummer by a long shot). The surrealistic theme of the movie did tend to ignore the somewhat darker side of his character that could be pretty nasty indeed... glad they included his family makeup/mixup as an element, explains a lot about his drive, etc. I had heard that he had known about his sister being his mother from a very young age but had put it out of his memory. This subplot worked itself into the story pretty well. I'm not sure that Dick Clark had that much to do with his initial success at all, the men never really knew each other all that well. The big thing about the movie last night was the applause by the full house audience as the credits were running, quite loud and sustained. Looking around, most if not all of the people in there were our age (60 to 70) and all were very much shaken by the movie. How did he say it? " Our memories will be whatever we want them to be" or something like that. That is just about what I felt. The things that happened and were happening to me while I was listening to his records fill an enormous part of my memory bank. I'm sure that held true from everyone I saw leaving the theatre. He had such an impact on so many lives

O'Brien's character development is really thought- provoking. I was really saddened to hear of his demise. It takes a special kind of writer that can take the time to develop such complex character traits that he laid down for this tragic tale.

In this movie Cage's character falls into the almost unheard- of category of someone who has convinced himself that his life is over and selects suicide by alcoholic consumption. I know a lot of drunks but none that I can honestly say ever really could be defined as trying to drink themselves to death although quite often their friends and family would tell them this if only to try to shock them into sobriety. Usually they were just a "party person that somehow lost control". Just before they realize they are at death's door they say "help me!" or some inane thing like that but it's too late by then.

Cage's character's burning of his possessions, among them pics of his family(?), his feeble bleat of "I'm sorry" to his boss upon being fired, his almost apologetic proposition of Shue's character, all of these defined someone looking desperately for pity but really defined a person who could care less about whatever the future held for him as long as it didn't allow him to suffer too much.

Shue's character, on the other hand, is the classic co- dependent sufferer. She personifies a kind- of long term Stockholm syndrome by accepting all this abuse from her pimp in nearly unconditional submission and then blaming herself for his eventual destruction that she really had quite a bit to do with but absolutely no control over. These flaws are not all that uncommon. Society would like you to believe they are uncommon but our overcrowded prisons and, unfortunately, sometimes morgues belie that assumption. In real life there is usually an underlying belief or condition that justifies this situation in the mind of the principle, and sometimes these beliefs and conditions are just about as weird as you can get but usually the principles have no trouble accepting them. The usual exception is that, in the movies these people are all beautiful, as they are in this one, but in real life they all look like they belong on the Jerry Springer show, or perhaps Jerry Springer rejects which is just about unimaginable. Am I making sense? Anyhow, the characters in this movie react to each other in situations so unlike what 99.9% of us ever experience that it fascinates us, that is why we watch these movies. We tell ourselves: "So this is what some people's lives are like? Wow, this is fantastic but it could never be me!" And then we watch the film credits and turn off the TV and go off to bed. Sometimes we have nightmares. I didn't. Didn't even consider it. Just too far- fetched to ever relate to my life. Thank god!

This movie was a masterpiece. It ranks as one of the very best in film history, if not the best. At Cannes people yelled and screamed, couldn't believe just how good it was. The profound atrocity was a combination of two completely brainless acts, the first being Zack Stienberg's hatchet job for US release, supposedly requested by either Warner Bros or The Ladd Company (one blames the other now) and the second was the lack of anyone (and everyone)to post anything in this great film for Academy Award consideration, of which probably as many as 14 nominations and 4 sure- fire Oscars went down the toilet.

These atrocities were perpretrated, I believe, with two reasons in mind, the first to preserve the dim hope of "The Killing Fields" (Daly & Semel's baby) of garnering any awards... and second, to try to boost up the non- foreign chances. Warner Bros knew just how good it was, that goes without saying. The problem was... they already had their share of cash cows and they wanted a real star- studded showpiece to point at. The small minds already had their showpiece but, alas, it was an "eye- tallyan" flick with a producer/director who didn't communicate well. The hatchet job was carefully planned, I believe... the so- called "sneak preview" was done in Canada and not well received, probably due to the fact that the sound system was over- amped and the film 'broke' 3 or 4 times during the showing, what a farce! The awards snub started with the GGs and carried right thru. What a myriad of stupid and utterly pointless decisions! Must have literally tore Leone's heart out when he learned what they had done.

Morricone's score was a sure- thing Oscar, no question about it. DeNiro and maybe even Woods would have fought it out for best actor, Tuesday Weld as supporting actress, any one of 4 or 5 other supporting actors & actresses, most notably William Forsythe, cinematography, film editing, the list goes on & on... (best picture...Amadeus???? give me a break!!) Just what in the hell were they thinking?

Saw it in a theater 20 years ago and then again on TV about 1998 and finally in its correct format(on DVD) about two years ago and again last week at a friend's house. Stirred up all those angry thoughts all over again... sorry about that, getting' old & crotchety.

Remember this movie from when I was in middle school. What impact! Saw it with my uncle who was a local high school basketball coach and remember him saying "boy, wouldn't I like to have a couple of those tall guys (Watusi) playing for me. Sure looks like he wasn't alone, this movie may have been responsible for Dikembe Motumbo, etc. in the NBA, in a roundabout way. This movie may have been the first exposure to their existence for the majority of America. The plot really deviated from the book (read later) but not all that much from an artistic point of view. The book was written almost as a documentary, as I remember. Would have been quite boring and probably impossible to make or follow without some type of plot interest. The cinematography was the first thing that reached out and smacked you, from the opening credits with the name rolling across the screen through the unbelievable stampede scene (how the hell did they do that?) and all the way to the end. It may be true that some of the characters were a little weak and the plot was somewhat cheesy but come on!!! Whoever compares this to "Raiders" is probably too young to realize just what went into the making of the movie and forgets the technology advances and the fact that this was the first one, kind of set the standard. Absolutely no comparison... how can you compare the Mona Lisa to a photo of Julia Roberts? Give me a break!