do you think varrick was planning..........
to get rid of sullivan all along?
shareNo. He had the passport planned and the money ratio to include Harmon.
I think his eyes show a change of plan when Harmon gives the "I'm gonna wail" speech and says "If you can't do that, Jimmy Dick, what use are you?" It's what Varrick means when he replies "You're callin' it, kid."
(aka ecarle.)
I think his eyes show a change of plan when Harmon gives the "I'm gonna wail" speech and says "If you can't do that, Jimmy Dick, what use are you?" It's what Varrick means when he replies "You're callin' it, kid."
--
Its great watching Walter Matthau chew gum at various speeds as he realizes that not only is Sullvian a dangerous loose cannon of a partner -- but fully inclined to KILL Varrick. You can see Varrick starting to throw out one plan in his mind and start another right then -- without a word except "You're callin' it, kid."
The first thing Matthau does is to make sure that he gets Sullivan drunk -- " There's some whiskey in the cabinet" and though we don't see it, clearly he waited for Sullivan to fall unconscious and then...he took the money with him. Drives Sullivan nuts the next day(Varrick says something like "I've put the money somewhere safe") -- and Sullivan never gets close to Varrick again.. Varrick sets him up all the way...to be killed by Molly.
And upon finding the body says, "You called it, kid."
Well said.
shareThank you.
I am a big fan of Charley Varrick and if you watch it a second time, you can see Matthau's character thinking about things and you see EXACTLY the decisions he makes in retrospect.
As I noted above -- and it took me a couple of viewings to understand it -- once Varrick knows that Harman might kill him, its really over between them. Varrick gets Harman drunk,takes the money ...and Harmon NEVER gets a chance to get close to Varrick again. Varrick was smart enough to get away from Harman immediately -- and pragmatic enough to set Harman up to be VERY brutally killed by Mollly.
Indeed, and ultimately, Varrick uses Molly as his OWN executioner -- Varrick doesn't have to kill Harman and the bank boss Maynard Boyle-- he gets Molly to do it for him.
No. He had the passport planned and the money ratio to include Harmon.
---
I suppose he was ORIGINALLY willing to honor the money ratio, but it seems he used the "passport ploy" as part of his specific plan to GET RID of Harman...and save itself.
It is part of the brillant plotting of Charley Varrick that we THINK we are watching one plot(Charley Varrick meeting with the gun shop guy to get the information on the passport woman and then make passports for Harman AND himself) when we are really watching ANOTHER plot(Charley meets first with the gun shop guy and then with the passport woman ON PURPOSE to draw the Mafia killer after him -- he even gives out his card and address to the woman -- knowing that Harman is there and will likely get killed.)
Very early on , we watch Charley switch out his dental records with those of Harman so...he probably has no plan at that point, but when Harman gets killed...he has the body he needs.
"What goes on in the brain of Charley Varrick?" Plots, brillilant plots, that's what.
Yeah... This remains WM's most masterful yet underseen role
shareWalter Matthau is one of the more fascinating movie stars in Hollywood history.
The fact that he BECAME a star is amazing enough. He earned it via years and years as a supporting actor who was just so good that he became famous himself. Then The Fortune Cookie won him an Oscar (Supporting Actor) that made him a bankable star. Then The Odd Couple -- a giant hit in 1968 -- made him "almost a superstar."
He got a million the next year in 1969 to make Hello Dolly with Streisand(they hated each other, but they are great together) and voila..Walter Matthau became a "new star for the 70s."
But pretty much only the 70's. His looks -- never great, but amusing and mildly handsome in the beginning -- started falling apart in the 80s. TV movies saved hjim for awhile until Grumpy Old Men hit big for Lemmon and Matthau in 1993.
20 years before Grumpy Old Men, in 1973, Matthau was very bankable and Charley Varrick was the first of three movies in a row where Matthau tried to "break away from comedy" to make dramatic crime thrillers: Charley Varrick, The Laughing Policeman, and The Taking of Pelham 123. The Laughing Policeman was good, if a bit flawed. Varrick and Pelham 123 were masterpieces of their type. Matthau(who had been in thrillers like Charade and Mirage in the 60s) was believably tough but ALSO a bit amusing in these films.
Charley Varrick is the best of them. The superior plotting, the scary toughness of the tale. The "brains vs brawn" game of the story(with Joe Don Baker as a hulking psychopathic brawn.) And Matthau pretty much looked his best in Charley Varrick-- longish fluffy hair suited him in the 70's,.
2 keys, by the way, to the Walter Matthau star career: his looks were OK, but he had a great VOICE, with a New York accent and a line reading style that could go from deadpan to honking.
Matthau was also very tall, which allowed him to hold the screen when shorter supporting guys like Martin Balsam and Jack Klugman could not.
Yeah... Unconventional looking leading men like Matthau, George C. Scott, and Claude Raines paved the way for guys like Gene Hackman, De Niro, and Nicholson
shareThat's right. That's why Walter Matthau isn't THAT unusual. "Pretty boys" like Redford and Beatty(back then) and Pitt and (for awhile) Depp today have always been in contrast to good character guys like Matthau and Scott. "Regular guys" could relate more to Matthau than to Redford back then.
And...around 1973(the Charley Varrick year), Matthau made it on a list of "male stars favored by women" alongside Redford and Beatty and McQueen and Newman. Something about his laid back manly manner attracted women fans.
I've always had an affinity for actors who deftly alternated between character work and leads, many of whom are attractive men
Talking here fellas like Eric Bana, Timothy Olyphant, Billy Crudup, Micheal Jai White, and the eternally underused Tony Todd
"And in 1973(the Charley Varrick year), Matthau made it on a list of "male stars favored by women" alongside Redford and Beatty and McQueen and Newman. Something about his laid back manly manner attracted women fans"
That's one of the perks of being male... Our looks don't count as much in comparison to our female counterparts, and we're sexually desirable for much longer in our lives
Scarlet Johanson's days of appearing on a list of "Most desirable women" are rapidly drawing to a close, and the public's appetite for seeing Sydney Sweeney in the buff won't be nearly as strong a decade from now
I've always had an affinity for actors who deftly alternated between character work and leads, many of whom are attractive men
Talking here fellas like Eric Bana, Timothy Olyphant, Billy Crudup, Micheal Jai White, and the eternally underused Tony Todd
---
That's a good list...Perhaps Olyphant...with his heroism on "Deadwood" and "Justified" ended up the starriest of them. There's a niche for being good for leads or character work even without being a "top level star"(some of THOSE people don't get to stretch much at all.)
---
"And in 1973(the Charley Varrick year), Matthau made it on a list of "male stars favored by women" alongside Redford and Beatty and McQueen and Newman. Something about his laid back manly manner attracted women fans"
That's one of the perks of being male... Our looks don't count as much in comparison to our female counterparts, and we're sexually desirable for much longer in our lives
---
Yep ,, a real perk, and I mean it. I suppose that's why Matthau connected with MEN too. You might never look like Robert Redford, but Matthau was in the realm of possiblity. That's why Charley Varrick is so good among other reasons. Because of the "brains vs. brawn" angle, we didn't have to imagine having to win a fist fight like Eastwood. And it WAS a nice middle-aged male fantasy to see Matthau bed that beautiful mob secretary(I bought that given the circumstances; famously that was Jack Lemmon's wife.)
---
CONT
Scarlet Johanson's days of appearing on a list of "Most desirable women" are rapidly drawing to a close, and the public's appetite for seeing Sydney Sweeney in the buff won't be nearly as strong a decade from now
--
Some women graduate to middle aged and older roles --Kate Hepburn, Shirley MacLaine, Meryl Streep, Cate Blanchett -- but Hollywood remains pretty damn heartless about putting a lot of the sexbomb young ones out to pasture after a certain age. It seems like no politics can stop the business decision. The sex star shelf lives of Kathleen Turner, Sharon Stone, Geena Davis, even Debra Winger...just didn't last.
This post
https://moviechat.org/nm2858875/Sydney-Sweeney/65d54570315e83261f44a6f5/Yoiks reminded me of our conversation here
The time in an actresses career where she can induce drooling out of every heterosexual man on the planet is very limited
This post
https://moviechat.org/nm2858875/Sydney-Sweeney/65d54570315e83261f44a6f5/Yoiks reminded me of our conversation here
--
Hey, now!
---
The time in an actresses career where she can induce drooling out of every heterosexual man on the planet is very limited
---
I suppose , but Ms Sweeney is but one in a LONG line of women who have managed to obtain fame -- and, importantly -- fortune, by cashing in on how she looks right NOW. That particular pose is overtly sexual too -- she's willing to do a bit more than just put a bikini on and cavort in the waves. (She's also in a recent Rolling Stones video, riding down the sunset strip ON a iimo, showing off her assets.)
Indeed, I elected to take note of Ms Sweeney -- already quite willing to go nude and topless on her HBO show -- versus Jennifer Love Hewitt, who has spent a couple of decades teasing HER bosom while resolutely refusing to go topless(see also: Racquel Welch back in the day.) Snarky side comment: Sydney doesn't quite have the "facial beauty features" beauty of Hewitt...the body is the selling point.
There was a documentary about movie nudity(yes a DOCUMENTARY) on Netflix or some such. I watched it. (As one gets older, watching is perhaps the true order of the day). But a couple of attractive middle-aged actresses(not very successful ones, long retired) said the same thing: "I did nudity when i was young because I knew i WAS young, my body looked great, it wouldn't be forever, why not get paid to show it off?"
Its up to them.
Meanwhile, the somewhat older actress who played Adrianna on The Sopranos -- Drea DeMatteo -- the very week I'm posting this, said that her OnlyFans account saved her from financial ruin and losing her home -- and she's well past her "young" days. We all have to make a living.
Indeed, "and at my age"(such a horrible indictment), I'm heartened by all the OLDER sexy women in movies and TV and...I can attest...in real life. If everybody keeps sexy in mind and reasonably fit in body...things can last a long time, erotica-wise.
Sweeney has one of those unimusual faces that can look either extremely sexy or really weird , depending upon the angle. From the little I've seen of her work, she 's a much more capable actress than Hewitt
shareSweeney has one of those unimusual faces that can look either extremely sexy or really weird , depending upon the angle. From the little I've seen of her work, she 's a much more capable actress than Hewitt.
---
I'll grant all of that...its how an actress can advance beyond just "series TV" (which is mostly where Hewett works, yes?)
And I "almost took it back" on Sweeney's face because it does have traditional beauty that CAN be seen indeed, from the right angles. (I'm reminded of the sister-group singer Alana Haim, whose odd facial features in the movie Licorice Pizza played both ways and who did one long scene in a bikini to distract attention to HER body.)
There can be no doubt that physical beauty -- whether female ("cheesecake") or male ("beefcake," from the Tarzan actors to Tony Curtis to Arnold Schwarzenegger) is an asset that many actors and actresses ride as far as it can take them. Just sticking to the "straight audience' for the moment, women like to look at handsome men, men like to look at beautiful women, and Hollywood has RUN on that since the beginning. (As well as allowing a FEW talented but not great looking people become stars, too.)
There was an actor who won Best Actor in the 60's(for In the Heat of the Night) and moved up briefly from support to stardom: Rod Steiger. He then moved back down to "top support." He said "I didn't remain a star because I learned that women didn't go for me on screen."
Side-bar on this "OnlyFans" business. It seems to me that even as a lot of movies and TV have backed away from sex scenes and "exploitation of the female body," nature abhors a vacuum and so lots and lots of ladies are "showing it off" on OnlyFans and lots and lots of men are paying for the privilege to look.
"And I "almost took it back" on Sweeney's face because it does have traditional beauty that CAN be seen indeed, from the right angles. (I'm reminded of the sister-group singer Alana Haim..."
I'll also liken Sweeney's face to the young Shannen Doherty. All jokes about her allegedly misplaced eyes aside, when watching a re-run of Charmed the other day, I was struck by how either strikingly gorgeous or odd her face can look, depending upon the angle of the shot
In regards to OnlyFans filling a potential gap that cinematic nudity may have once occupied... This trend has actually been going on for awhilehttps://www.npr.org/2005/08/15/4800468/slates-hollywood-economist-onscreen-nudity-drops
Note the dateline on that story
Whatever else one wants to say about SNL these days, Syd's looking beautiful here (facially, as well as physically) here https://youtu.be/E4fh7eBK4qE?si=RMaF6SXb7k1MpnA_
shareWhatever else one wants to say about SNL these days, Syd's looking beautiful here (facially, as well as physically) here https://youtu.be/E4fh7eBK4qE?si=RMaF6SXb7k1MpnA_
---
Yes, her face is quite attractive here and we also get to hear her voice, a sexy element of stardom at any level.
A funny thought: this "study in female sexuality" among our movie stars past and present is buried here in a thread about a plot point in Charley Varrick(Varrick's betrayal of his henchman Harman.) But that's OK, this is MovieCHAT and tracing back from the voluptuous Ms. Sweeney through this thread I think we got here first in contrasting MALE star looks(Robert Redford versus Walter Matthau back in the day, with Matthau joined by George C. Scott, Gene Hackman -- and before them, Spencer Tracy -- in getting it done WITHOUT Redford looks ) and then on to females.
This SNL clip does show something shared by Sydney Sweeney and Walter Matthau -- still photographs alone didn't illustrate their star quality(though lingerie photographs work a LOT better for Sweeney.)
You need film or video to show the facial expressions of BOTH Sweeney and Matthau, and to play up their voices (HIS especially.)
But then there is this contrast between the Matthau career and the Sweeney career. Matthau never had leading man looks, so he had to work as a supporting player/character guy for a LONG time until he generated enough audience goodwill to score a few leading parts and become a star.
But young Sweeney -- 20-something -- is one of those buxom sex-embracing beauties who has gotten a certain stardom right out of the box, evidently through one cult HBO show(Euphoria) and the requisite TV and movie support roles that make or break a young actress.
CONT
As her SNL monologue attests, Sweeney is indeed now getting lead roles in small movies ("Anybody But You") and "supported" Dakota Johnson in the now-notorious "Madame Web," about which, these items:
Dakota Johnson hosted SNL a few weeks ago to PROMOTE Madame Web(a Marvel spin-off of Spider-Man but evidently more tied to Sony), and now its a megabomb so her co-star Sweeny could do this monologue gag: "You may have seen me in Euphoria and Anybody But You -- I KNOW you HAVEN'T seen me in Madame Web."
And so Sweeney got to bat clean-up for Dakota Johnson and fess up to the Madame Web as a bomb.
There are photos of Johnson and Sweeney at the "Madame Web" premiere...side by side...two beautiful women(one blonde, one brunette) and just a bit of "chill" between them, it seems to me. I may be imagining it. WAY back in the day, blonde Marilyn Monroe and brunette Jane Russell could headline "Gentlemen Prefer Blondes" and evidently maintain a friendship off-screen. I wonder about Johnson and Sweeney.
Johnson in an interview did make a point we should consider: she's in her 30s(dangerouslly aging in Hollywood for a woman) while Sweeney is till in her 20s and thus, Johnson joked "the younger girls couldn't relate to her."
Oh, well, Johnson and Sweeney are beautiful "girls" launched in careers and we will see where they go from here.
I recall Catherine Zeta-Jones skipping false humility in an interview once and saying she followed her showbiz career from -- New Zealand, was it? -- to Hollywood "because that's where all the attractive actors go to make it big." You better be CONFIDENT that you are attractive to pursue these careers. Or you're Walter Matthau and simply confident that you are a good actor and can play comedy or play villains(which he did a lot in the begiinning.)
CONT
I'm on the fence regarding Sweeney's voice. She 's fond of vocal fry, and YouTube critic Alex Neyers perhaps as assessed her intonation most aptly: "She speaks like a disaffected college girl". At any rate, let's also note not only her face and cleavage, but scrumptious rear end in that clingy white dress during her SNL monologue. This almost made the lame jokes she was sadled with bearable
And since we mentioned GCS earlier: Were you aware that his final widow is still alive, here in '24 https://moviechat.org/nm0886556/Trish-Van-Devere/65ecfefe7d8cd469e417ef49/Birthday-age-83-in-2024-on-March-9
A small yet highly determined cadre of pundits are now contending that SS's ruse to stardom heralds a cultural shift away from Wokeness/PC https://www.sosuave.net/forum/threads/sydney-sweeny-is-bringing-back-bube-culture.281323/ Read the three links in The OP. In other words, we COULD, just maybe, soon end up with a social atmosphere similar to the one in which Charley Varrick was spawned
shareCOULD, just maybe, soon end up with a social atmosphere similar to the one in which Charley Varrick was spawned
--
Hmm...well, I responded to your other links about other aspects of this breasts/woke scenario. I'm not sure if I have my own opinion on it yet.
Excellent bringing Charley Varrick back into the conversation.
Which reminds me: Charley Varrick was a fictional studio film(Universal) which actually took its cameras into a REAL Nevada brothel, showing (except for an actress or two) REAL Nevada sex workers(circa 1973, check out the big hair on some of them). This was the Mustang Ranch, very well known at the time. The real owner -- Joe Conforte -- appears in the scene by name. (Walter Matthau discreetly is NOT in this scene...evil Joe Don Baker anchors it, with his immortal line: "I don't sleep with whores...at least not knowingly.')
Decades later, a fictional film was made about The Mustang Ranch with Joe Pesci as Joe Conforte and Helen Mirren as his long suffering wife. The real-life story ended witih Conforte killing his wife's boxer lover.
On a similar note: Someone just recommended the movie El Condor to me, which has somehow escaped my attention prior. Don't suppose you've seen this one , Rog. If so, what were your thoughts
shareSide note of my own:
The documentary you're referring to is titled "Skin"
Side note of my own:
The documentary you're referring to is titled "Skin"
---
Aha. So perhaps we have both seen it.
The idea is a clever conceit: to take "seriously" the concept of how American studio films(under pressure from European and other international films before them) slowly let nudity into the movies. And whether -- for the actresses who took it off in particular(the men didn't seem exploited) , it left any lasting damage on them. Some yes, as I recall but the others -- nope, they were glad they did it when they were young.
As I recall, the documentary made an early stop at the shower murder scene from Hitchcock's Psycho(1960) to show how some nudity was "slipped into" that scene. But it was go-go-go from 1968 on: that's when the R and X rated movies showed up.
And frankly, the ones who claim that nudity "damaged" their career(Think Shannen Elisabeth)weren't especially versatile thespians to begin with
Another side note: The following interview https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/ywc/episodes/2015-12-11T07_29_01-08_00 may be just as fascinating for you as it was to me
https://youtu.be/9OBK8KS8Ims?si=zsuzUg8tgWJ1Fpxr
Someone in Youtube's comment section opined that this skit was nothing more than an excuse to get Syd into a Hooter's outfit. This is probably true, nonetheless we must give SNL's writers an ounce of grace here:
Relying on her "comedic chops"(Sweeney's proved herself very adroit at drama elsewhere)to carry these scenes makes less sense than locking two gangs of machete-wielding Turks and Armenians in a storage vault overnight, then expecting any of them to still be alive the next morning
That's a good list...Perhaps Olyphant...with his heroism on "Deadwood" and "Justified" ended up the starriest of them. There's a niche for being good for leads or character work even without being a "top level star"(some of THOSE people don't get to stretch much at all.)"
And if we're being honest, most "top level" stars aren't the most versatile of actors. Ex. Talented as Denzel Washington is, does anyone seriously think he can match Lawerence Fishbune's versatility. Brad Pitt's definitely improved as an actor, but he has yet to pull off a transformation as masterful as Crudup's portrayal of J. Edgar Hoover, or Eric Bana's turn as Chopper Reid.
"Yep ,, a real perk, and I mean it"
As do I. One of the many disagreements which led to my falling out with The Men's Rights Movement was my conviction that , even though our society has it's share of problems which disproportionately affect men, there's still many advantages to being male. I seriously can't imagine too many things more depressing than knowing, in one's late 20s, that your looks will soon start declining, and that women only a decade younger than will be the ones potential mates will be thirsting after
"That's why Charley Varrick is so good among other reasons. Because of the "brains vs. brawn" angle, we didn't have to imagine having to win a fist fight like Eastwood"
Matthau/Varrick embodies this quote:
"The order of progress, is, first, barbarism; afterward, civilization. Barbarism represents physical force. Civilization represents spiritual power. The primary condition, that of barbarism, knows no other law than that of force; not right, but might. In this condition of society, or rather of no society, the man of mind is pushed aside by the man of muscle. A Kit Carson,20 far out on the borders of civilization, dexterously handling his bowie knife, rifle and bludgeon, easily gets himself taken for a hero; but the waves of science and civilization rolling out over the Western prairies, soon leave
Continued:
"Shorn of glory". Much as I love early Eastwood, much of his early career was pretty much a thought experiment: "What would happen if a dime-novel anti-hero ended up in a post-industrial world?" He rose to fame on the back of shallow, adolescent fantasies of manhood, the likes of which would later reach their nadir in gangsta rap and the like
"Some women graduate to middle aged and older roles --Kate Hepburn, Shirley MacLaine, Meryl Streep, Cate Blanchett -- but Hollywood remains pretty damn heartless about putting a lot of the sexbomb young ones out to pasture after a certain age. It seems like no politics can stop the business decision. The sex star shelf lives of Kathleen Turner, Sharon Stone, Geena Davis, even Debra Winger...just didn't last"
It never lasts, and politics can't change such things, for the simple fact that we're talking basic biology here. Tits that are drooping down past a gal's knees, coupled with an ass that's down on the floor aren't anywhere near as appealing as the perky, firm assests of a 19 year old co-ed. Whether or not ScarJo will prove a string enough actress to remain as viable as Helen Mirren or Julianne Moore remains to be seen. Whether or not Syd Sweeney ends up being the 2020s version of Elisha Cuthbert is also up for grabs
And if we're being honest, most "top level" stars aren't the most versatile of actors.
---
Lots of times over movie history that has been the case. Rock Hudson, for instance, was a Number One star for quite a few years (and not bad AS a good looking star) but never really Oscar material (he turned down Ben-Hur and To Kill a Mockinbird, and those roles won Oscars for Chuck Heston and Greg Peck.)
Talented as Denzel Washington is, does anyone seriously think he can match Lawerence Fishbune's versatility.
---
Probably not. Denzel has two Oscars (One Supporting, one Lead) but in the beginning he also had great LOOKS (facially) which Fishburne did not. So Denzel's the A-last leading man who can carry a movie(STILL, in his sixties.)
And Denzel is likely under this heading often applied to old time stars like John Wayne and newer stars like Tom Cruise: "He always plays himself" -- which is, of course, what the audience wants to see: the same STAR.
---
Brad Pitt's definitely improved as an actor,
--
Yes, he was beautiful as a youth but also a bet Reptilian in his face...he aged(as many movie men do) into a softer and more lived-in face. And he CAN act, within his range -- his Oscar winning role in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood was perfect for him.
---
but he has yet to pull off a transformation as masterful as Crudup's portrayal of J. Edgar Hoover, or Eric Bana's turn as Chopper Reid.
---
Stars aren't always too willing to change their look or their persona THAT much.
--
CONT
Another example of a huge A-list star without necessarily SEEMING like one is Leo DiCaprio. He started as a child actor, and was a very handsome youth in Titanic(THAT one made him an insta-star), but as child actor's do, his face lost its cuteness as he aged and his acting became a bit one note.
And yet, he succeed massively. Two "auteur" directors did it: Scorsese(casting him in film after film after film -- thus helping Scorsese finance his films with a bankable star) and Quentin Tarantino (only two films thus far -- Django Unchained and Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, but both were modern classics and big hits.)
Since Leo mainly works with "big name directors"(add Spielberg to that; and right now he's working with Paul Thomas Anderson)...he stays in welll-reviewed movies, usually hits ...and he keeps working at high pay.
It almost doesn't MATTER how well Leo acts, or whether his looks have held.
CONT
"Yep ,, a real perk, and I mean it"
As do I.
---
Sure.
--
One of the many disagreements which led to my falling out with The Men's Rights Movement was my conviction that , even though our society has it's share of problems which disproportionately affect men, there's still many advantages to being male. I seriously can't imagine too many things more depressing than knowing, in one's late 20s, that your looks will soon start declining, and that women only a decade younger than will be the ones potential mates will be thirsting after
--
Well though some things have changed over time, certain biological imperatives remain: men seeking young beautiful women (to procreate, or just to have fun with) and beautiful women seeking men(hopefully wealthy, but at least able to provide.) Even when women make as much or more than their men, there are still certain instincts in place.
"At the movies" famously older handsome men (or not so handsome, like Bogart) got paired with pretty young women on the screen AND in their private lives -- Cary Grant, James Stewart, Gary Cooper....Jack Nicholson, Al Pacino, Michael Douglas.
And yet, even not at the movies, I think that men "between marriages" can often date -- and eventually remarry to -- younger women.
CONT
Matthau/Varrick embodies this quote:
"The order of progress, is, first, barbarism; afterward, civilization. Barbarism represents physical force. Civilization represents spiritual power. The primary condition, that of barbarism, knows no other law than that of force; not right, but might. In this condition of society, or rather of no society, the man of mind is pushed aside by the man of muscle
--
True, that. And yet Matthau's Varrick outwits "the man of muscle"(Joe Don Baker) through a series of interconnecting ruses. The movie suggests that if any of Varrick's planned tricks had failed, he might well have gotten killed. But he stayed on his toes and faced down his foe at the end and..everything worked perfectly.
CONT
The sex star shelf lives of Kathleen Turner, Sharon Stone, Geena Davis, even Debra Winger...just didn't last"
It never lasts, and politics can't change such things, for the simple fact that we're talking basic biology here.
---
Yep. And actresses who made their name in bikinis or with nude scenes alone..it just goes away..
in SOME ways. At the same time, we live in an age with some very sexy older actresses who -- through health/fitness regimens, wigs(sometimes) and a little bit of plastic surgery -- maintain a mature sex appeal. Julianne Moore comes to mind.
--- Whether or not ScarJo will prove a string enough actress to remain as viable as Helen Mirren or Julianne Moore remains to be seen.
---
Oops. You said Julianne Moore right there. I missed that.
Helen Mirren is a whole other thing. She has aggressively and successfully maintained a "sex star persona" well into her fifties and whatever age she is now. I used to joke that Helen Mirren must use contracts that REQUIRE she do a nude scene.
I suppose I'm reversing gears on how "young female sex stars are put out to pasture." The truth is we do HAVE some aging female stars with sex appeal but, still..the market(for young men especially) requires those young nubile women.
CONT
---Whether or not Syd Sweeney ends up being the 2020s version of Elisha Cuthbert is also up for grabs
---
A perfect example of a young beauty from the past.
One theory I've discussed with others (so it isn't just mine):
Even with the MeToo thing and Harvey Weinstein in prison, Hollywood seems to remain a place where powerful, middle-aged men ENJOY suddenly taking sexy women out of star parts. It is done quietly, almost secretly, but suddenly...these women aren't stars anymore, they don't land major movies anymore. And its almost as if the male executives waited to "pull the rug out from under" the women in question.
Its a tough town.
Why assume that anyone is doing it out of enjoyment? Executives are out to make money. They will continue giving work to an actress as long as the public wants to see her. When they stop giving them starring roles it's because newer, younger, prettier women have come along, and that's what audiences will pay to see.
shareWhy assume that anyone is doing it out of enjoyment?
---
Everything you write below is true:
Executives are out to make money. They will continue giving work to an actress as long as the public wants to see her. When they stop giving them starring roles it's because newer, younger, prettier women have come along, and that's what audiences will pay to see.
...but I dunno, sometimes I just get the feeling that its a bit of a power trip to have such power over beautiful young women. They just seem to lose their star careers so quickly.
I will give but one example of the male mindset, from producer Robert Evans own autobiography:
Evans had been "really big" as a Paramount studio chief and producer in the 60s/70s: Rosemary's Baby, True Grit, Love Story, The Godfather, Chinatown.
By 1993, he was somewhat the hasbeen and struggling as a producer. He produced a "sex thriller" called Sliver with Sharon Stone(newly hot from Basic Instinct.) Stone's contract called for Evans to STAY AWAY from her on set(something personal.)
And Evans wrote something like "I"d seen it a million times. Some starlet who suddenly becomes a star thinks she's God's Gift and tries to take over everything." The bitterness was pretty direct about "some starlet."
So...maybe Evans and others weren't too upset when Stone lost her star career?
But I buy your take, certainly.
I'm sure there are all sorts of individual cases like the Evans-Stone one you mention. I reckon producers and other wealthy Hollywood execs are making passes at actresses all the time, and trying to bully them into stuff a la Harvey Weinstein. However, I think the industry's reliance on money trumps everything else. Evans could certainly have cast some other actress in the role, but he knew Sharon Stone would sell tickets, so he swallowed his pride and hired her. He knew if he didn't, the next guy would, and his film, and bank account, and reputation, would suffer for it.
No doubt he had the last laugh when age caught up to Stone and she was no longer a bankable commodity, but my feeling is that overall Hollywood is emotionless towards actors and actresses, and hires and fires them based on the bottom line, even though some individuals in the industry may have feelings about certain stars.
Add to that:
MeToo has had it's most pronounced effect on mainstream studio flicks. Streaming has remained awash in T&A
I see a LOT of shows streaming that are dripping with DEI, #MeToo, and whatever other activist causes are hot at the moment.
shareI could have been more precise:
When compared to Hollywood theatrical releases, streaming is still awash in T&A. Talking here shows like Euphoria, and that production with Lily Rose Depp. Although "Poor Things" is currently racking up accolades, and Emma Stone spends a large portion of this oe fully nude, and being fucked in every way imaginable
Stop by this page, when chance permits https://moviechat.org/general/General-Discussion/65c526c5bd83f27d803cfa5c/The-roots-of-MeToo?reply=65ca5eda1726c5243a4f5f70&animate=false
The conversation we're having lines up with what's being discussed here
"Whether or not Syd Sweeney ends up being the 2020s version of Elisha Cuthbert is also up for grabs
---
A perfect example of a young beauty from the past"
And(in Cuthbert's case)hardly the ancient past either... This was in The 2000s. Sweeney has dramatic chops, and has been willing to go the extra mile by revealing the goods on camera, so she may end up having more staying power, though whether or not it'll be Mirren-esque durability remains to be seen
Her Anything But You co-star Glenn Powell is another example of the way in which the careers of actors and actresses diverge: Dude's 35, and he's just now hitting his stride
Stop by this page, when chance permits https://moviechat.org/general/General-Discussion/65c526c5bd83f27d803cfa5c/The-roots-of-MeToo?reply=65ca5eda1726c5243a4f5f70&animate=false
The conversation we're having lines up with what we're discussing here
Stop by and join this conversation, when chance permits https://moviechat.org/general/General-Discussion/65f14b1e2408cf050207b35f/Tits-Save-America
shareHeh. You can't believe how heartened I am to be invited to join a conversation that has somewhere within its links the phrase: "Tits save America."
I skimmed the articles and of COURSE the political folks want to debate Sydney Sweeney's breasts. Its kinda funny. Tits are great AS tits...why turn them into a big debate.
I'm reminded of the movie poster, WAY back in 1959, of a big boobed Marilyn Monroe cradling Jack Lemmon and Tony Curtis in her chest for "Some Like It Hot" -- with the "tag line" "Join Marilyn Monroe and her two bosom companions, Tony Curtis and Jack Lemmon..."
...two bosom companions.
Look -- bosoms to humans is like certain colors on birds: a mating call. Its sort of funny politicizing it all.
By the way, I would like to note that Sydney Sweeney actually calls hers her "tits" whereas Fifty Shades star Dakota Johnson calls hers her "boobs."
"Boobs" is how women USUALLY describe them to keep things funny and silly and non-sexual. "Tits" is what you call them for sex. Ms. Sweeney knows exactly what she is saying.
I may indeed join that conversation. Keeps me young!
"By the way, I would like to note that Sydney Sweeney actually calls hers her "tits" whereas Fifty Shades star Dakota Johnson calls hers her "boobs."
This reminds me of what's observed he
https://sheckymagazine.libsyn.com/is-comedy-inherently-masculine
Earlier in her life, Sweeney was apparently the lone female student in the martial arts academy she attended. Is it really a coincidence that her stance on sexuality is remarkably brash, and not remotely sanitized?
Do join the discussion over on "Tits Save America", Rog. The already-lively conversation over there will be further energized
We're not really reversing gears... There are a select few actresses who continue to be marketable , even after their sexy young thang days are in the rear view mirror, much in the same way there are a handful of Tom Bradys, who continue to be powerhouses on the field, well in to their 40s. That's not indicative of the norm though. Reminds one of this scene, from a largely underseen and forgotten flick from J. Singleton's filmography https://youtu.be/5jvH4SHEZUM?si=ma6wpnxpLki0Oc0p Many an actor and pro athlete never received the sort of counsel Phipps provides to Malik and Fudge, free of charge
And we're living in an era where a large percentage of Americans(In and out of Hollywood)have embraced beliefs similar to those of Malik and Fudge: "We shouldn't have to become intellectually and psychologically robust. The System is rigged, and it needs to stop being so fucked up, before we do anything"
The first thing Matthau does is to make sure that he gets Sullivan drunk -- " There's some whiskey in the cabinet" and though we don't see it, clearly he waited for Sullivan to fall unconscious and then...he took the money with him. Drives Sullivan nuts the next day(Varrick says something like "I've put the money somewhere safe") -- and Sullivan never gets close to Varrick again.. Varrick sets him up all the way...to be killed by Molly.
--
I return to elaborate a bit on just how great the Charley Varrick script is here.
Everything I mention in the paragraph above is true, but the great thing is that -- we don't SEE Matthau execute this part of the plan. We have to figure out that it happened, and that comes later.
In a less sophisticated movie, we would get this scene:
Varrick leaves the trailer, Sullivan keeps drinking and drinking(he was already drunk in scenes we DID see.) DISSOLVE TO: Suliivan passed out on the bed. We see Varrick peering through the trailer door, he opens it, comes in, confirms that Sullivan is passed out, and quickly and quietly goes to the money bag, checks the money, walks out of the trailer with the bag.
That probably is EXACTLY what happened, but neither the writers nor director Don Siegel felt the need to film that scene.
We could see it in our MINDS when Varrick called Sullivan from the phone booth saying he was in Reese -- and then tossed some trash in a basket marked "Keep Albequerque Clean."