Print the legend but don't mention Coppola!

[Tim Strzechowski]

The Internet Movie DataBase doesn't give sales figures for _High Noon_, but
_On The Waterfront_ earned 9.6 million.  Plus, it had a few additional
academy awards over _High Noon_.  If you ask me, _High Noon_ has achieved
more popularity due its allegorical qualities and universality, despite its
simple storyline.  _On the Waterfront_ -- though a magnificent film -- lacks
those qualities.

The best thing Coppola ever did was put his name to _American Graffiti_ to
ensure it could get made in the first place.

Tim

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Mackin" <paul.mackin at verizon.net>
To: <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 9:44 PM
Subject: Re: Print the legend but don't mention Coppola!


> This is a trivial question but was On the Waterfront "much more popular"
> than High Noon. Might have made more money (don't know) but both  movies
won
> a huge nuimber of awards (academy and otherwise). Plus everyone remembers
> the famous theme music from High Noon (do not forsake me o my darling).
All
> I remember from Waterfront was that "coulda been a contender line" which
was
> admittedly great coming from Brando's mouth. Not saying I liked either
film
> that much or any other made in the U.S. in the 50s . It's been said before
> that John Wayne wouldn't have asked the townspeople for help. And everyone
> knows Elia Kazan used Waterfront to try to justify his own naming of
names.
> I do of course agree with Paul that the settlers vs Indian theme so
> recurrent in Westerns reenacted American's formation. Would wish also to
add
> that many other quintessential American issues were also present. Effete
> Easterners vs manly Westerners. Farmers vs cattlemen. Cowmen vs sheepmen.
> Law vs order. Individual vs society. Civilization vs Barbarity (not
> necessarilty Indian).
>
> I'm just babbling. Hated Westerns after the 40s.
>
>         P.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Nightingale" <paulngale at supanet.com>
> To: <jlundy at gyk.com.au>; <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 1:50 PM
> Subject: MDMD: Print the legend but don't mention Coppola!
>
>
> > Thankyou John. Your reference to High Noon reminds me of a film that
came
> > out at roughly the same time, the flag-waving/union-bashing On The
> > Waterfront. Much more popular. And Invasion Of The Bodysnatchers managed
> to
> > be ambiguous, at least to those too blind to see. The western remained
the
> > most subversive genre, I feel, precisely because it claimed to be about
> > where America came from: sometimes the cracks showed. Pat Garrett and
> Billy
> > The Kid was a great Vietnam film and this was probably why the genre
went
> > into decline in the 1970s; it had become impossible to make such films
> > without reference to the developing world (which was how the 'wild west'
> had
> > always been portrayed). We still hear people blame Heaven's Gate for
> killing
> > off the western. Again its revisionist account of the C19th range wars
was
> > unacceptable. In fact, Cimino's first cut (before the studio took the
film
> > away from him) was five hours plus; the battle sequence alone, refusing
to
> > be a celebration of violence, lasted about 90 minutes and (apparently,
see
> > Steven Bach's far from sympathetic account of the making of the film,
> Final
> > Cut) left little to the imagination - dangerous stuff!
> >
> > So where the hell does Pynchon come into all of this? I said earlier
that
> GR
> > could only have been written in, and was therefore about, the period
when
> > elected governments (in the US and Western Europe) were being challenged
> by
> > popular dissent. Pynchon is clearly a writer of dissent, in terms of
both
> > content and form, in everything he has produced (I can't off-hand think
of
> > anything that should be of comfort to the political right or
conservative
> > elements in society generally - but then you only have to think of
Reagan
> > and Born In The USA to know how risky it is making such a statement).
> >
> > Pynchon, and also Coover and Delillo, and Donald Barthelme, belong to a
> > generation of writers who took popular culture seriously. It's
interesting
> > that, as Hollywood discovered counterculture-politics, the literary
novel
> > discovered 'trivia' - one of the characteristics of postmodernism. In
M&D,
> > we have serious historical figures being treated as a music-hall
> double-act:
> > this is as far from great-man history as it's possible to get.
> >
> >
>
>