« More Panels About Critics and Food | Main | Berkeley Buzz Be »

September 24, 2008


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


I'll be whittling away at my twelve -- as much as I can, anyway -- in the coming weeks, too. I have "Salesman" coming tonight from Netflix, and next week I'll probably get "Gesualdo: Death for Five Voices", then "La Dolce Vita" (shut up, I'm working on it!). And I'm told "Titicut Follies" is available for purchase from Frederick Wiseman's website...

Phil G

I’m always surprised that these WWII movies are generally perceived as being so sentimental. It almost as if the people making such statements have not really seen the movies they are writing about, but as with Thompson’s fucktard opinions on Ford suggest, even those with a supposed high level film erudition can badly misread a movie and genre.

One could make a long list of WWII movies that go against this sentimental grain, but one particular movie would be SAHARA. I remember being literally jarred at how brutal and decidedly unsentimental that movie is. This is more surprising, if what I’ve read about the movie is true, considering it was meant to be a propaganda movie of sorts.

Pete Apruzzese

Glenn -
Nice review, I rate Sands of Iwo Jima to be as nearly unsentimental as Ford's They Were Expendable.

I don't believe that Sands is a public domain picture. You're probably remembering that it was on numerous video releases in the early days, Republic Pictures used to license their stuff out to just about anyone so you'd see several versions at the same time. Sadly, Republic's current owners don't seem to believe in restoring their elements - look at the awful Quiet Man DVD - even though most exist in their vaults.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Tip Jar

Tip Jar
Blog powered by Typepad