Irishtom29
2nd Lieutenant
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2008
- Location
- Wheaton Illinois
I think the movie was a stinker. I watched it a few weeks ago and can't recall a single scene--that's a bad movie.
I just saw "News of the World" on HBO yesterday - I don't agree with Tom Hanks' politics but I think he is a good actor; his portrayals are believable. I thought the movie was quite entertaining.
The movie is set in the midst of the Reconstruction in Texas and there are some interactions between ex-Confederates and Federal occupation troops. Hanks has to demonstrate that he has taken the oath of allegiance to the government and explain his activities and business when questioned by the Federals.
There are some scenes that seem to portray that ownership of firearms by ex-Confederates was prohibited. I know that ex-Confederates were disenfranchised from voting and in some places their land and property was confiscated but don't think I have heard of a firearms prohibition. Were firearms prohibited during Reconstruction?
Not true.There are some scenes that seem to portray that ownership of firearms by ex-Confederates was prohibited.
I know that ex-Confederates were disenfranchised from voting and in some places their land and property was confiscated
Agreed.I never inquired about Tom Hanks' politics. Never had any reason to.
Everyone has a right to "spout his personal opinions" any time, any where. And everyone else has a right not to pay attention.Agreed.
I didn't think about such either, until celebrities decided to start
spouting their personal opinions about every topic under the Sun.
They don't want to hear my opinions, I don't care about theirs.
Can these people just work on what they are good at ... acting, music ... or whatever ?
Absolutely !Everyone has a right to "spout his personal opinions" any time, any where. And everyone else has a right not to pay attention.
Or spout their own contrary opinions.Absolutely !
The First Amendment is paramount to our freedoms.
Thus I can "spout my opinions" as well.
While ... as you said ... those that may disagree with me ... can always ignore me.
Yes, very much so !Or spout their own contrary opinions.
Take it from someone who has been an extra. I had a couple of 12 hour days on a set, for in my case a total of about 25 seconds of screen time. It does require some creature comforts - a place to sit down, get off your feet, have a bite to eat, a cup of tea, etc.Take it from someone who's tagged along on of those scout trips.
IT SUCKS!!!!!!!
Worse part is, you can get begged or hired to do it, put a ton of time and miles into it, then a studio axes it deciding to not make the movie. In the world of Independent films its a real problem.
I've never been an "extra", but I know quite a few people who have.Take it from someone who has been an extra. I had a couple of 12 hour days on a set, for in my case a total of about 25 seconds of screen time. It does require some creature comforts - a place to sit down, get off your feet, have a bite to eat, a cup of tea, etc.
I hate when you see{Edited} a mountain range in a movie that takes place in Mississippi. Such as “The Reivers”.From there they go first to Dallas, complete with a cattle drive passing through it and MOUNTAINS off in the distance!
I was a background actor in a scene with RuPaul on the show "Ugly Betty" It was pretty hysterical. I was part of a "middle aged couple" in the audience at a drag show. The guy that was my "husband" and I worked together in a previous show. The other show was called Mercy (a hospital drama) and I actually found myself on IMDB for that one. That in itself is pretty funny that I have an IMDB page. I had fun, it was boring at times but we were fed well, met some interesting people too.I've never been an "extra", but I know quite a few people who have.
They say the exact same thing !
I don't think any of them were trying to become a "star", they all said they thought it would be fun.
Then they were bored to death and worn out from just sitting around the sets every day.
Actually, I only learned a few days ago ... it's improper to call these masses of people "extras".
Background Actors seems to be the new term.
Anyway, looking back, they now have stories from an unique
part time job.
Not one of them ever saw a famous "movie star" "movie director" or " movie producer".
They all beeeched about that back then, but now they all seem to love having been an extra.
I feel that way about Clint EastwoodSame here.
I hate when they stereotype the Confederates as evil, mangy social ills too......I saw the movie and agree with your assessment. Tom Hanks and Helena did a great job in their portrayals.Tom Hanks' new western News of The World is yet another contemporary semi-political diatribe with a tenuous connection to the Civil War and Reconstruction. Hanks portrays a character named Captain Kidd - but obviously no relation to the legendary pirate of the same name! - who is a veteran of the 1st Texas Infantry who is now "getting by" reading semi-current newspapers to audiences of settlers on the Texas frontier in 1870, hence the title. I don't know just how authentic this mode of support might have been, but since various lecturers, evangelists, and hucksters performed in a similar manner, it is at least plausible. Among his travels from community to community he encounters many rough "frontier" types, among whom many are former Confederates who are, other than the Captain himself, almost universally portrayed as racists at best and outright pedophiles at worst who naturally get what's coming to them.
The best thing about the film is Hanks' co-star, a presumably twelve year-old actress named Helena Zengel who plays a German immigrant captive rescued from the Kiowa and whom Kidd takes on a long journey to reunite with her relatives in the Texas Hill Country. The worst thing - other than the mangy ex-Confederates, that is - is that like both movie versions of True Grit the makers of this made NO effort at all to accurately portray the topography where it allegedly takes place, North and Central Texas in 1870. It begins in a reasonable facsimile of Wichita Falls along a much-too-large and flooding river that I suppose is supposed to be the Red where Kidd first encounters the girl, who is much too clean-looking to have been a captive of the Kiowa. From there they go first to Dallas, complete with a cattle drive passing through it and MOUNTAINS off in the distance! He has taken her there to find the nearest Federal Reconstruction troops to turn her over to. Failing that, he decides to take her to her relatives in Castroville in the Hill Country. Along the way they follow some river through the desert with those same mountains still off in the distance; on their trip they encounter more Kiowa. Naturally Castroville looks NOTHING like the Hill Country; San Antonio comes off a little better, though there's no sign of the Alamo anywhere. I stayed through the credits to see where this was in fact filmed: NEW MEXICO, which as we all should know looks little like North Texas, especially the mountains!
The story itself isn't bad, assuming you can pretend it's happening somewhere else, and Hanks and especially the girl are very good, believable and ultimately likeable characters. After my recent reading about conditions on the Texas frontier during Reconstruction and desperadoes like Ben Bickerstaff, Bob Lee, and John Wesley Hardin it makes some of the characters they meet seem more plausible, though as usual for a movie they're far too exaggerated. Also, the stupidity of bringing them to Dallas - what happened to Fort Worth, where the cattle drive belongs; or even better and more correct, Fort Griffin, which I doubt the novelist who wrote the book this was taken from had even heard of. There is also a Hell-roaring camp of buffalo "hide skinners" that might've also not been too out-of-place in the Fort Griffin area, though once again the shenanigans that occur there strain credulity a bit too much. I won't bother you with any more details of the plot in case you decide to check it out for yourself, but you get the idea; surprisingly, I enjoyed it overall and recommend it for the acting and characterizations of the principals, but with the obvious reservations I've mentioned here.
Speaking of Josey Wales, and the making of movies, here is a you tube showing that might be enjoyable."to avoid fainting, keep repeating to yourself: it's only a movie, it's only a movie.."
it is make believe
it is not real
it is a profit seeking enterprise
the producers, director, writers, actors are the dancing bears in the circus of life
it is like the outlaw Josie Wales, Birth of a Nation, the General, the Lonely Trail, the Tall Target
sometimes fantasy is substituted for reality, I try to recognize the border between
does anyone feel bad for the castaways on Gilligan"s Island or angry that the professor can make a radio out of coconuts but cant patch a hole in the boat