Point Blank (1967) Retrospective
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 22 авг 2024
- George discusses John Boorman's excellent 1967 film "Point Blank" starring Lee Marvin. The filmmaking, Boorman and Marvin's friendship, Quentin Tarantino's questionable detractions, the Parker novels of Donald Westlake and more!
If you enjoy my videos and would like to support, consider donating on my Patreon: / filmjournalgeorge
Follow me on X: x.com/filmjour...
See what I've been watching on Letterboxd: boxd.it/DVbJ
I greatly appreciate this essay since I found Tarantino's bizarre review of this amazing movie infuriating. Calling it "TV" doesn't make any logical sense whatsoever when it's such a uniquely and beautifully crafted movie.
Truly can’t understand it. I don’t think he rewatched before writing bc he says a bunch of wrong things like Lee Marvin bursts into Angie Dickinson’s apartment when he means Sharon Acker. So glad you enjoyed the video!
@@FilmJournal I was thinking the same exact thing because he said on a podcast a couple years ago that he hasn't seen the movie in possibly decades.
Point Blank is the closest thing we have to a Sergio Leone noir movie.
Keep up the great work. Your channel is legit.
Lee Marvin was one wicked interested and talented guy
Totally!
I’ll have to check this out.
Absolutely!
A film I really need to return to. I enjoyed it on my first go-round, but Boorman is one of those true idiosyncratic filmmakers. A man of such singular vision, it either hits or it doesn't. One of the god-tier neo-noirs of the era.
Boorman is the man- idiosyncrasy is something I really enjoy in a filmmaker. Watched Exorcist II the other day. Marvelous if you appreciate it it as a Boorman film, as like a prelude to Excalibur- as mythic. Not just as an exorcist sequel. Thanks for watching!
Awesome timing as I just rewatched this great film just a few days ago. The stark LA landscape, towering performance, and great color choices really resonant with me. Along with the awesome unconventional narrative.
Glad it all worked out! Thanks for watching!
I got here by way of Westworld. I enjoy Point Blank and you have excellent insights. I didn't even wince so hard at the neologism ""adaption."
great video. thank you
Of course my friend 🙏🏻
Superb as always man
Honored to hear it! Thank you
The remake with Mel Gibson is my guilty pleasure but this one is the real deal!
Same!
I love this film, the story, and its many adaptations. Darwyn's version is fantastic. I love Tarantino but disagree with his assessment. Thanks for this video
You bet brother- thanks for watching! Glad you enjoyed
This is a movie that rewards a second viewing. My first go round I didn't quite "get it". Its not what I was expecting. On rewatching, Boorman takes a pretty simple noir tale and makes it into something truly unique and interesting. It feels very much like a late 60s vehicle. A few years later and you would not get something quite this psychedelic. Tarantinos review seems quite lazy. Is the book worth picking up? Its been on my list for a while but this revelation gives me some pause.
Wholeheartedly agree!
But yeah his book is good
im sorry the book is 100% better....even the GN you used by the late great Darwyn Cooke was better then this...I enjoy Lee but he wasn't Paker ...its okay at best
I enjoy all for their own special reasons- thanks for watching!
I saw this several years ago in a revival house and it came across as very dated. The audience was laughing and couldn't take it seriously. There were a lot of cringey scenes.
I unreservedly recommend the books. I read the entire series (including spin-offs) as well as the comic books. If you want hard-bolied noir, check them out.
What scene is cringe?
@@FilmJournal I saw it several years ago but one scene that immediately comes to mind was a drunken Lee Marvin hitting on his future girlfriend going home from work.
I also wasn't fond of the director's editing style. From what I understand he was influenced by the French new wave but it struck me as superfluous and pretentious. I never understood how this film garnered such a dedicated following If you're a fan if noir, read the books.
@@crustymcgee6580 i had the privilege of seeing a re release of this movie back in 2000, and unfortunately the audience's reaction wasn't much better than yours.
it's definitely not a movie for people who think in terms of everything from the past being "dated", (time goes forward, you know) or complain about nothing ( a drunken Lee Marvin hitting on his future girlfriend?) or noir snobs (ugh).
those comic books you mentioned are pretty "cringe", and the source novels aren't much better. in fact, you can pretty much keep everything from this franchise that isn't point blank as far as i'm concerned.
@@plasticweapon The audience watching the film new nothing about noir so they had nothing to be snobbish about. They were just regular people who wanted to watch a movie. They had no preconceived notions of what was dated or not. Their laughter was a spontaneous reaction to several scenes that came across as unintentionally funny and awkward. What may have worked in a film over half a century ago might not work among contemporary audiences. If they did, we'd still have scenes of evil men donning black top hats trying women to railroad tracks and twirling their mustaches.
Regarding the books, they are regarded as some the finest as exemplars of crime noir, a venerable genre garnering immense respect among the literati. Unlike the film, these novels have withstood the test of time and have cemented their place among the pantheon of great crime novels.
I’m usually not this mean on here, but I hate this review bc it’s the kind of cutesy academic word salad that serves only to nullify the anxiety this guy had while watching a movie about really tough manly men. It portrays something raw and real about male relationships and power that he cannot allow himself to entertain. I’m no tough guy either, I wouldn’t- couldn’t- hang with this biker gang. But I can’t imagine disparaging the movie and reducing it to a “deconstruction” of masculinity in the movies when clearly it’s about something so much more. This kind of analysis robs one of having a visceral reaction to a film and instead tucks art away into a little box where it’s not scary anymore.