Opal, Paul Madvig’s Sister.

According to Hollywood, that is. I think that’s the one thing that amused me most (yes, it was hard to pick out of so many delightful film-book continuity lapses) in the movie so far.

Film notes:

-The opening scene is very different. I especially enjoyed the self-righteous slap delivered to Paul’s face by Janet. Also the way he was turned on by it.

-“Ed”.

-“Nick”.

-Many scenes were combined. Hey, as long as they at least keep it in, I don’t care how they rearrange plot points. Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter have taught modern audiences to avoid being purists. Even Shakespeare continues to be mangled from time to time, which is a much greater sin.

-Everything is so exaggerated! Even given the cinema traditions of the time.

Janet: *sneaky sidelong glance*

“Ed”: *observes sneaky sidelong glance* *responds with quizzical sidelong glance*

Janet: *not-so-sneaky sidelong glance followed by eyelash-batting for extra emphasis*

“Ed”: *distracted gaze*

Janet: *self-satisfied, very obvious sidelong glance*

“Ed”: *brief attempt to pay attention to Paul and Senator Henry*

Janet: *pointed stare*

“Ed”: *total distraction*

Janet: *lustful, ‘I totally want your babies’ gaze of doom*

“Ed”: *leaps up* “Erm, gotta go!”

Ahahaha, what a fun scene :)

-“Ed” walking in on Opal. Lucky for him and film censors of the time that he hadn’t entered the room a few minutes later.

-As if family relationships in this story weren’t convoluted enough, Opal is now apparently Paul’s sister, not his daughter. Hm.

-This leads to misplaced and carefully edited lines like: “It’d be especially nice if that someone were his sister.”

Initial reaction: Oh, I remember that li–wait…it wasn’t here, it was–and…oh…sister? *brain drips out nose in reaction to violation of the original text*

— — — — —
I like it so far. Really, I do!

And if you like Veronica Lake, she’s also in a great movie called Sullivan’s Travels, directed by Preston Sturges. I highly recommend it.

Oh, and Paul’s spontaneous shoe toss at Jeff? Genius.

glass02.jpg

Posted in Screening | Comments Off on Opal, Paul Madvig’s Sister.

Massacrists and the Convoluted Origin of Heels

I did some googling for the origin of the word “heel”, and came up with this explanation:

HEEL began its life in the U.S. underworld 1) meaning a sneak thief, perhaps a) from the idea that a heel was as low as one could get on the human anatomy, and this type of petty criminality was considered one of the lowest forms of criminal – close to the bottom of the barrel – among criminals themselves. b) because it describes an informer, which was considered to be the lowest of the low. c) it is a euphemistic shortening of the underworld expression ‘shitheel,’ but others have said that ‘shitheel’ was formed later as an intensive of ‘heel.’ d) Jonathon Green of Cassell’s Dictionary of Slang suggests that it might have derived from the expression DOWN-AT-THE-HEEL, a phrase describing someone so hard pressed for money their shoes are run down at the heels, and thus a poor destitute, slovenly and shabby low unwanted person, who might be continually AT one’s heels. e) Eric Partridge in his Dictionary of the Underworld suggested that it might be a shortened form of ‘heeler’ (from verb ‘heel’ as a dog) a criminal’s unskilled accomplice, a follower at another’s heels. 2) anyone who was contemptible or despicable, and this usage very quickly moved into the general population.”

Apparently, it’s also used in wrestling.

Hope that helps! In case anyone is interested in film noir slang, there’s another good site here.

On to The Glass Key. Continue reading

Posted in Class | Comments Off on Massacrists and the Convoluted Origin of Heels

Hmmm.

A fairly illogical blog title, yes. (Made even more so by the fact that I’m referencing a silent movie in a film text class. Hehe.)

But hey, who can resist Chaplin?

Posted in Random | Comments Off on Hmmm.