tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post1574461316332690043..comments2024-03-27T21:42:56.131-05:00Comments on 1001plus: I'm Your MutineerSJHoneywellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13550007053995112090noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-47134123833476396532015-08-25T18:58:07.031-05:002015-08-25T18:58:07.031-05:00I knew aabout the 1984 version but haven't see...I knew aabout the 1984 version but haven't seen it. I'll put it on the Letterboxd list, though, so I don't forget about it. Thanks for the recommendation. SJHoneywellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13550007053995112090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-5679394644993573592015-08-25T13:55:28.529-05:002015-08-25T13:55:28.529-05:00Since comparisons are a big part of the conversati...Since comparisons are a big part of the conversation here, I'll throw in my two cents for the 1984 version with Mel Gibson and Anthony Hopkins. The bloat there is in the music and how long some shots are held, but the story itself is pretty muscular and to the point. I've not seen the 62 version for more than thirty years, primarily because of what you have mentioned, but I watch the 35 version every year or two and the 84 version , I've seen five or six times. Here is a share for you if you like: https://70srichard.wordpress.com/2014/05/04/the-bounty/Richard Kirkhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16428986542891346618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-89649060615553716622015-08-25T13:03:30.982-05:002015-08-25T13:03:30.982-05:00I really should rewatch the 1935 version. I rememb...I really should rewatch the 1935 version. I remember liking it, but don't really remember much else from it.<br /><br />One of these days, I suppose...SJHoneywellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13550007053995112090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-80417164893983680392015-08-25T10:08:15.701-05:002015-08-25T10:08:15.701-05:00I prefer the 1935 version, not just for Laughton, ...I prefer the 1935 version, not just for Laughton, but also because Gable had a lot more charisma on screen than Brando, at least in this film. I agree with the other poster that said this was a period of time where Brando seemed to be more acting for himself rather than for the viewing audience.<br /><br />I honestly remember less about the 62 version than the 35 version. I do remember being curious about it because Brando became almost a native of Tahiti for the rest of his life.Chip Laryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00787403805554027107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-66936762420965775902015-08-24T19:56:29.101-05:002015-08-24T19:56:29.101-05:00The version I watched, including the full musical ...The version I watched, including the full musical beginning, middle, and end, ran just over three hours. Cut those and you're down to about 2:45, which is a good 45 minutes more than we need.SJHoneywellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13550007053995112090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-60008167432182895502015-08-24T19:14:32.517-05:002015-08-24T19:14:32.517-05:00I enjoyed this, but wasn't blown away by it. H...I enjoyed this, but wasn't blown away by it. Honestly, I can't remember what I thought of the runtime. It's been a while since I watched it.Dellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05634519605152190304noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-44279768610334962552015-08-24T18:27:23.248-05:002015-08-24T18:27:23.248-05:00It is certainly pretty. I'll give it that.
Yo...It is certainly pretty. I'll give it that.<br /><br />You're right about the overture/entr'acte/postlude as well. I'll admit that I skipped through them. I'm always a little wary when a film starts with that color wash and the word "overture" because I know what's coming. Important Picture sums that up. There are a few that probably qualify, like say <i>Lawrence of Arabia</i>, but most have that come off as just puffery.<br /><br />Laughton really was the king of roles like Bligh.SJHoneywellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13550007053995112090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-11985352739125973992015-08-24T17:38:46.377-05:002015-08-24T17:38:46.377-05:00You hit the nail on the head about this one. It is...You hit the nail on the head about this one. It is beautiful to look at but that's only enjoyable for so long and then you start yelling at the screen "Do Something!!!" <br /><br />It came along during that roadshow cycle kicked off by This is Cinerama where everything had to have entrance music, intermission and exit music to show it was an Important Picture. That's fine if you're telling a pageant story along the lines of How the West Was Won that has enough going on to fill the time but this didn't. <br /><br />I prefer the '35 version and Gable's Christian to Brando's fussy actorly performance. Was Brando a better actor than Gable overall, yeah but sometimes he was too busy showing off his technique and performing for himself rather then the audience. This is one of those times. Howard does a good job as Bligh but Laughton's performance is unbeatable.joel65913https://www.blogger.com/profile/14526657073681774683noreply@blogger.com