Movies. the Oscars, and Stuff
Thu., March 9, 02:12 PM
Like a lot of other people, I watched parts of the Academy Awards show the other night. Not because I had seen any of the movies. Not because I am such a big movie expert, or even a big fan. But there are strange connections there.
Maybe you have to become a true movie fan early in life. When I was a kid, movies were an occasional treat, not a weekly tradition. (Even the kids from the orphanage went to the movies more often than we did!) Thirty cents a week times three kids was just not in our budget. So let’s say I was interested, but not impassioned.
I read the occasional movie magazine, if someone else had bought it and was finished with it. I even cut out pictures – but I certainly didn’t hang them on my walls. After all, I didn’t have my own room.
We didn’t have television in our house, as I have mentioned, until 1952, and we never watched the Oscars. The rule was that kids didn’t stay up to watch TV on school nights. No arguing, that was it. In the House on Court StreetI might have been able to eavesdrop a little bit from the bedroom if my parents had been watching, but my mother never did.
In 1955 we left Court Street – in March – and moved into a larger house, with upstairs and downstairs. And that year, for the first time, I waited until my parents had gone to bed and sneaked downstairs to the set in the living room. That was the first time I ever watched any part of the Oscars, and in many ways I remember it more than complete shows that I saw later on. The winning song, because I always want to know the song, was “Three Coins in the Fountain.” But the movie that swept almost all the awards that year was “On the Waterfront.” Marlon Brando was still young and handsome – and respectful. I have a vivid memory of Eva Marie Saint accepting her award and saying, “I may have the baby right here!” Incidentally, I didn’t actually see the film till years later.
I began watching more movies in the years that I was babysitting. Late evening TV was usually old films that the studios sold because they didn’t consider them valuable. (Eventually Congress said they had to include some good ones too.) I saw “It’s a Wonderful Life” before it was a classic. And I developed a huge crush on John Garfield, not knowing he’d died some years previously.
Early in our marriage, Husband and I enjoyed movies together, but saw more of them on TV than in the theater. That, perhaps, is where I lost my manners; I always explained things to him as the story progressed, and I keep forgetting you’re not supposed to speak in a theater during a performance.
I didn’t see any of the movies in this year’s awards. I don’t intend to see two of them, though I believe they are fine pictures: “Good Night and Good Luck” and “Munich.” I am extremely uncomfortable with historical films when I remember the actual events, and I don’t want to live through it again. I hadn’t even heard of several of the others. I was glad to see George Clooney win something. because he has been contributing to the industry so long. Do you remember the first “E/R”?
We seldom go out to the movies any more. Even when Husband was in better physical shape and I had less trouble driving, the prices seemed so outrageous. We were willing to wait until the movie was on television. Now just think about it; if two or more people are going to watch, it is cheaper to rent a tape or DVD, and if the movie is any good at all, it’s worth buying and watching over and over. (Except Husband asks for DVD’s and then lets them sit in their wrappings. PiA.)
This time of the year a lot of self-proclaimed experts talk about movies and the movie business in general. There’s a whole group who are upset about “Brokeback Mountain” and “TransAmerica.” They’re afraid these films are sending out a message that Americans are gay. They want you to know that “it doesn’t mean that half the people in this country are gay.” Well, of course it doesn’t. But it would be nice, wouldn’t it, to think that maybe a few more Americans had become a little more compassionate? Or is that out of fashion these days?
A trend I’m finding interesting is the speed with which films go to DVD. There’s even talk of releasing the DVD the same day the film comes out. Theater owners, of course, are adamantly against that practice, but the studios don’t care. Producers will make their money regardless of which way the business goes, even if many theaters close down.
While there is little sympathy in my heart for theater gougers, I’m not sure I like this new development. It would be such a shame to lose the possibility of a movie for a dating couple, or for a group celebration. (U.D.’s first birthday “party” was “Star Trek: the Movie,” followed by cake and ice cream at home.)
I’m seeing faces in television episodes now that I recognize from years gone by. My reaction is always “I know that face, but I know it younger.” Last week’s “NUMB3RS” had such a face; it turned out to be Robert Forster, who we thought might be the next John Garfield. (Except, of course, there will never be another John Garfield.) On “House” this week, a similar occurrence: a nice-looking older man who somehow looked familiar. It was Howard Hesseman; I never knew he could “clean up so nice.”
I guess I’m just a TV kind of gal.
