850 Something Wild (1961)

Discuss releases by Criterion and the films on them. Threads may contain spoilers!
Message
Author
User avatar
Barmy
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 3:59 pm

#26 Post by Barmy » Mon Mar 31, 2008 6:32 pm

This got a brief release at IFC maybe a year ago in a new 35mm print. The film ain't all that.

User avatar
HerrSchreck
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am

#27 Post by HerrSchreck » Mon Mar 31, 2008 6:56 pm

Barm-o as a NYer I'm surprised the location shooting alone didn't capture you (not to mention edith bunker as a sailor-bouncing slut). It's definitely one of those films that blooms in your mind when you're not watching it-- but the rampant oddness, the unspoken props to the balm (losing ones-self in the low budget anonymity) of the ghetto... and just the flat out weirdness of the narrative. It has its flaws, but they are part of its charm along with its oddness, If this film were made in France or by a frenchman at the exact same time we'd a had a dvd years ago.

User avatar
tojoed
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 11:47 am
Location: Cambridge, England

Re: Something Wild (Jack Garfein, 1961)

#28 Post by tojoed » Tue Apr 14, 2009 5:32 pm

Sony are releasing Jack Garfein's The Strange One in June, which gives the possibility that "Something Wild" may follow.

User avatar
HerrSchreck
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Something Wild (Jack Garfein, 1961)

#29 Post by HerrSchreck » Thu Mar 15, 2012 4:04 pm

Well well well, six years later look what finally came out on disc.. The r e a l SOMETHING WILD.. it's an MGM on-demand disc, and in full 1.33 AR.. Here's DVDTalk on the fulm itself:
with Miss Baker). Final Thoughts: A strange mix of realism and dreamy symbolism, played out in a sweltering, grimy New York City. Carroll Baker's portrait of a psychologically tortured rape victim is one of the most honest, vivid ones I've seen within that category, and Ralph Meeker, excellent as well, pulls off the impossible task of making his shadowy character both charismatically intriguing and repellent―two performers who were sadly undervalued during their careers. Sure to piss-off the most dogmatic of the woeful "politically correct" set (they don't enjoy anything), Something Wild's strange, illogically romantic spiral down into violence and madness, and eventually love (?), surely marked it as one of the most unusual dramatic offerings of 1961...and within that context, it's still quite arresting today. I'm highly, highly recommending Something Wild―a must-see for fans of the stars and this genre.

DvdTalk link.

Numero Trois
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 5:23 am
Location: Florida

Re:

#30 Post by Numero Trois » Mon Nov 16, 2015 9:41 am

HerrSchreck wrote:If this film were made in France or by a frenchman at the exact same time we'd a had a dvd years ago.
Garfein said pretty much the same thing on last night's TCM broadcast. Apparently Otto Preminger called him up around the film's release and consoled him about its dismal reception. He told him to give several decades for the film to gain appreciation and that if it had been a subtitled European one it would've been immediately acclaimed.

I think it probably works better thinking of it in a general sense as a film about "Trauma" rather than a more narrow-focused "Lost Girl in the City." The Holocaust survivor comparison someone made feels especially apt. A topic the director is well acquainted with.
Last edited by Numero Trois on Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
HerrSchreck
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Something Wild (Jack Garfein, 1961)

#31 Post by HerrSchreck » Wed Nov 18, 2015 3:37 pm

Isn't it painfully obvious that the man read my post from back then and of course parroted my statement? :wink:

I'm really getting tired of Jack posting with a Magical Maestro image (he thinks he's slick by using the censored pen-ink/blackface Ink Spot gag) on BBS's and writing with a sort of canine snap and bark.. last I heard he was posting elsewhere under the handle "Herr Fanny's-Husband."

Love,

Herr Fanny's-Husband
Image

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: 850 Something Wild (1961)

#32 Post by domino harvey » Fri Oct 14, 2016 3:33 pm

What a great release this looks to be-- wish Criterion dug into the vaults for stuff like this a bit more often, but what a way to start the year!

User avatar
jwo17
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2015 9:02 am

Re: 850 Something Wild (1961)

#33 Post by jwo17 » Fri Oct 14, 2016 3:49 pm

Agreed. Also wish it had been paired with The Strange One...but maybe that's forthcoming as a stand alone as well.

Very excited for the Foster Hirsch piece as he was a mentor of mine and quite the authority on Garfein.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: 850 Something Wild (1961)

#34 Post by domino harvey » Fri Oct 14, 2016 3:52 pm

I know Kino's been doing a good job of rescuing MGM's MODs, but is this the first one from Criterion?

User avatar
HerrSchreck
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am

Re: 850 Something Wild (1961)

#35 Post by HerrSchreck » Fri Nov 18, 2016 5:18 pm

Well I'll be. I can't believe this is finally getting the recognition it's deserved for so long. I don't know who's run the telecine on this, but christ the brain reels with the thought of throwing this up in HD on a large screen. With Copeland's score in restored audio. I think I did see it once in the cinema, and I felt like running up to the screen with a magnifying glass to look in the shop windows and examine all the battered faces on all those midcentury NY streets. I also have a heavy connection to this film beyond it's brilliance and Eugen S. shooting it, via The Actor's Studio (used to be there all the time in the 90's when I was an actor), the street & subway scenes up in the old 1960's Bronx... when she's sick on the train I think she gets off at 103rd on the 1 (Burroughs dealing territory in JUNKY), which was my stop for a few years when I was living with an ex by Columbia U.

This promises to be frigging sublime.. thanks CC... and hello all... and off I go. An old forum friend cued me in to the fact that this is coming, so I had to come see for meself, here and on the CC site.

User avatar
FrauBlucher
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Greenwich Village

Re: 850 Something Wild (1961)

#36 Post by FrauBlucher » Wed Dec 14, 2016 3:41 pm

Beaver... It looks pretty good.

User avatar
Lowry_Sam
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 3:35 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA

Re: 850 Something Wild (1961)

#37 Post by Lowry_Sam » Tue Jan 17, 2017 3:21 pm

jwo17 wrote:Agreed. Also wish it had been paired with The Strange One...but maybe that's forthcoming as a stand alone as well.
Very excited for the Foster Hirsch piece as he was a mentor of mine and quite the authority on Garfein.
Never heard of this title & assumed when I first heard of the announcement (w/out seeing cover) that it was just a repackaging of the Demme film. Now that I know it's from the same director as The Strange One, I'll have to check it out. Surprised Criterion released this one first, hopefully they're just waiting for licensing rights to expire for that one.

Rupert Pupkin
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 9:34 am

Re: 850 Something Wild (1961)

#38 Post by Rupert Pupkin » Sat Jan 21, 2017 6:23 am

I've received it yesterday and watched it with my video-projector... What a stunning photography! great transfer...
so far I only knew the 1:33 ratio SD transfer...

The booklet is interesting- I didn't think at first about the Travis Bickle connection (although "Something Wild" announces the Taxi Driver B.Hermann theme "all the animals come out at night ...")
some nice photos (too small) in the booklet : Carol Baker in white dress, barefoot sitting on a bed, reading a magazine (a which magazine it is ? b) do you know where I can find this picture in high-res ?

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: 850 Something Wild (1961)

#39 Post by domino harvey » Tue Feb 14, 2017 1:21 am

Well, I surely hated this film. Utterly contrived in every motivation and narrative misstep, with atrocious acting exercises masquerading as set pieces and a plot trajectory so misinformed I’m sitting here afterwards second-guessing whether it actually happened. Sadly, it did. The notes the actors hit are false and protracted (watch the tortuous first meal between Meeker and Baker for a preview of some godawful Freshman Drama prompt), and even the set bends to the will of the need for ugly and elongated areas to create open stages and prosceniums where none are called for in the filmic medium. I could not give less of a shit about how New York is shot in this film— we’ve all seen countless noirs from this era that tethered this aesthetic to something worthwhile, why praise a movie for doing the bare minimum here?

There’s certainly a key detail to talking about this movie that gets conveniently left out, namely that
SpoilerShow
Something Wild is what would happen if the troupes from Out 1 put on a performance of the Collector. I assume everyone skirts around the second half of the film because addressing it is more weight than a defense can possibly hold. The film was already pretty bad before Meeker showed up, and then when we think we've suffered the most we can in the film, those last fifteen minutes kick in and oh ho one learns the meaning of going off the rails. There’s a good reason no one ever wanted Terence Stamp to get with Samantha Eggar.

User avatar
matrixschmatrix
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm

Re: 850 Something Wild (1961)

#40 Post by matrixschmatrix » Tue Feb 14, 2017 1:52 am

Am I correct, in reading a synopsis, that this movie essentially ends with
SpoilerShow
What if it turned out Elizabeth Smart actually loved being held captive and married her captor?

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: 850 Something Wild (1961)

#41 Post by domino harvey » Tue Feb 14, 2017 2:06 am

You left out
SpoilerShow
and got knocked up. It's like, who doesn't watch Room and think Old Nick was a pretty swell guy all things considered

User avatar
movielocke
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am

850 Something Wild (1961)

#42 Post by movielocke » Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:46 am

Ugh the second half of the second half of the film is stomach churning.
SpoilerShow
I think they're going for one of those psych things: Stockholm syndrome or "learned helplessness".

Lord knows in an apartment with cutlery, a gas stove and open windows (to shout from) she could have devised a way out if she wanted. I suppose she didn't want to make a scene or wasn't capable of it?

For some reason not doing anything to get out takes me back to the bit where she cuts her clothing up to bits and flushes it, something she'd only do if she's internalized some really toxic perceptions of herself and her place in the world.

But yeah, a gas stove turn on the gas and the landlord will be bursting through the door before you know it.

User avatar
HerrSchreck
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am

Re: 850 Something Wild (1961)

#43 Post by HerrSchreck » Thu Mar 30, 2017 4:35 pm

domino harvey wrote:Well, I surely hated this film. I could not give less of a shit about how New York is shot in this film— we’ve all seen countless noirs from this era that tethered this aesthetic to something worthwhile, why praise a movie for doing the bare minimum here?

There’s certainly a key detail to talking about this movie that gets conveniently left out, namely that
SpoilerShow
Something Wild is what would happen if the troupes from Out 1 put on a performance of the Collector. I assume everyone skirts around the second half of the film because addressing it is more weight than a defense can possibly hold. The film was already pretty bad before Meeker showed up, and then when we think we've suffered the most we can in the film, those last fifteen minutes kick in and oh ho one learns the meaning of going off the rails. There’s a good reason no one ever wanted Terence Stamp to get with Samantha Eggar.
I take it that that comment about NYC being shot in the way it is in this film is referencing my raves for it, so I'll address this review directly.

First off, I understand that nothing is more satisfying for some than firing off rockets of aggravation directly at a film one was driven nuts by.. and firing them off fresh from that viewing-- speaking in declaratives, as though the reviewer of the film is writing for the entirety of the world and is jotting down some quick thoughts that surely represent the feelings of all who have clean common cinematic sense. The film is “bad” “shit” et cetera as though these are formally and officially understood facts across the width of the whole world.

Frankly everything that apparently drives some folks berserk with anger (which is not something I encounter an awful lot) over this film are the things I love about it. The characters--one must be warned--are completely and totally retarded. They do not act like characters in a conventional drama. "The window--open the window and go!" and vreep! out the window they go. If you’re looking for logical flow of script convention, you’re seeking to sip your cinematic coffee in the wrong house... you're getting some bizarre Bedouin tea poured from feet in the air, not Starbucks cap.

This film is about what happens in a big, decaying city when people in emotional distress withdraw, grow completely dislocated, and lose just about all contact with common sense and all the better angels of guidance in the outside world. It’s what happens when this dislocation creeps into almost every aspect of their decision making until the lost soul is barely recognizable versus the image of the sensible, functioning human being that existed before the slide.
"Go out the window and save yourself!"

In a large city, just about every day, you will see a perfectly able bodied 25 year old young man who’s taken the wrong turn in life, and he spends his entire day panhandling in the subway; rather than spending a moment’s time looking for a job, seeking help for a drug problem if he has one—no. Rather, he will sit there day after day after day NOT doing the very thing that would be the most obviously sensible thing to do were one to assume the individual wants to extricate himself from the predicament. Rather, something in his mind is shut almost completely off, and he will befuddle his friends and family who wonder “what the &^%$ has happened to ___? Why does he not take the very clear and obvious path to liberation?”

We see men and women in captive, abusive relationships. People are beaten, abused, stolen from—and the target remains, all semblance of integrity and self-defense drained away and they are degraded, befuddled, belittled, a meekly protesting remnant individual unable to stand up for themselves.

Something Wild is a tale about the kind of dislocation in a big city that’s rarely possible nowadays. We are all interconnected. We walk around with devices that put us instantly in touch with any kind of help, or talk, trouble, vice, any kind of companionship or contact with friends & family at the push of a button. Our lives leave literal trails. In the era running up to the mid 1980’s, people lived in dilapidated quarters of an extremely decayed and squalid NYC, a very different world of rust and decay and shambles of living; life could be lived extremely cheaply among the lice and the bedbugs and the mice and the roaches, there were very few cops, (and they were corrupt), there were few to no social services, vice was everywhere, crime ruled the streets, and the city was filled with strangely dissolute, curious individuals, people with unattended mental illness, people whose minds were permeated by the squalid nature of city tenement life, a kind of urban lost soul that could exist no-place else but in NYC.

The fact that these characters behave in a manner that makes little to no sense and drives the viewer insane with confusion because of the strange lunacy of their (lack of) decision making is what I love so much about it. It’s not an unflawed film—it’s nothing close to a universal film… it’s almost a film made for the intellectual urbanite who sees the unique beauty in certain early portrayals of lost urban souls living out on the rarely witnessed fringes. It may be that only people who’ve encountered this fringe form of urban life can find a film like this so satisfying. For me, the characters in Something Wild feel almost as if they’re the ones who’ve just happened to have passed on through. It could be about thousands of others—paranoid, muttering, making no sense, giving a shit about nobody and nothing like raucous Jean Stapleton. Like Taxi Driver, the city is the main character—even though, by contrast to other city symphonies and noirs, its somewhat understated but for the location shooting here and there..

I don’t doubt that Something Wild is something along the lines of a delicacy. But if you recognize the flavor, it’s ecstacy.

jojo
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 1:47 pm

Re: 850 Something Wild (1961)

#44 Post by jojo » Fri May 19, 2017 1:37 pm

movielocke wrote:Ugh the second half of the second half of the film is stomach churning.
SpoilerShow
I think they're going for one of those psych things: Stockholm syndrome or "learned helplessness".

Lord knows in an apartment with cutlery, a gas stove and open windows (to shout from) she could have devised a way out if she wanted. I suppose she didn't want to make a scene or wasn't capable of it?

For some reason not doing anything to get out takes me back to the bit where she cuts her clothing up to bits and flushes it, something she'd only do if she's internalized some really toxic perceptions of herself and her place in the world.

But yeah, a gas stove turn on the gas and the landlord will be bursting through the door before you know it.
I found the 2nd half pretty fascinating.
SpoilerShow
And I was especially intrigued by the mechanics of the door itself--you need a key to go out AND in. And I looked at the door open and close several times and didn't know where the upper keyhole lock was on the outside of the door. So is he really locking the door when he goes out? If he's just locking the door regularly, then Baker should be able to go out as it's only the upper lock that seems to give her trouble. Meeker is seen using the key on the upper lock to go out several times but at one point I also questioned whether it's more psychological than real. There is also one ambiguous line where Meeker tells Baker "You're hopeless." after yet another argument between them about opening the door. One is meant to take the line as Meeker being frustrated at Baker not accepting just living there with him, but reading it another way, it can also suggest that Meeker is implying Baker can get out anytime she wants to and chooses not to. When she finally does leave, it's only when the door is practically wide open.
I think the first half of the film does a pretty good job of predicting her actions and mindset of the 2nd half.
SpoilerShow
She was already setting herself up for isolation and self-confinement before she meets Meeker. This was evident when she moved out of her house to go live in a slummy apartment that was already pre-echoing Meeker's pad.
HerrSchreck wrote:[

Something Wild is a tale about the kind of dislocation in a big city that’s rarely possible nowadays. We are all interconnected. We walk around with devices that put us instantly in touch with any kind of help, or talk, trouble, vice, any kind of companionship or contact with friends & family at the push of a button. Our lives leave literal trails. In the era running up to the mid 1980’s, people lived in dilapidated quarters of an extremely decayed and squalid NYC, a very different world of rust and decay and shambles of living; life could be lived extremely cheaply among the lice and the bedbugs and the mice and the roaches, there were very few cops, (and they were corrupt), there were few to no social services, vice was everywhere, crime ruled the streets, and the city was filled with strangely dissolute, curious individuals, people with unattended mental illness, people whose minds were permeated by the squalid nature of city tenement life, a kind of urban lost soul that could exist no-place else but in NYC.
The biggest thing about having devices that allow us to connect is that it requires money. And for those that are living on the margins, and with mental illness (poverty and mental illness are often interrelated), they are further shut out of society, even more invisible, often by their own doing as well. There are still many people whose only real access to the internet is the public library. And increasingly not even the library, as many now require some sort of ID or library card number to use the computers. And for you to get that, you need a permanent address...
Last edited by jojo on Fri May 19, 2017 1:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
movielocke
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am

Re: 850 Something Wild (1961)

#45 Post by movielocke » Fri May 19, 2017 1:45 pm

Well she also has to live in a slummy apartment because I think it was illegal at the time for a woman to rent an apartment if she was single. Women had to live in supervised boarding houses like in the film Brooklyn , it's why Fran lives with her sister and brother in law in the apartment, and why all those married executives borrow baxters apartment since none of the single women are legally allowed to rent an unsupervised apartment, literally the execs aren't allowed to visit the women's domiciles.

jojo
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 1:47 pm

Re: 850 Something Wild (1961)

#46 Post by jojo » Fri May 19, 2017 2:01 pm

movielocke wrote:Well she also has to live in a slummy apartment because I think it was illegal at the time for a woman to rent an apartment if she was single. Women had to live in supervised boarding houses like in the film Brooklyn , it's why Fran lives with her sister and brother in law in the apartment, and why all those married executives borrow baxters apartment since none of the single women are legally allowed to rent an unsupervised apartment, literally the execs aren't allowed to visit the women's domiciles.
Right, but my point is
SpoilerShow
she was socially retreating from her family. She was living with her mother and stepfather in a comfortable house. She was never kicked out by them, nor did she have any practical reason to leave home, where it is clean and she is well fed and comfortable. She simply leaves. It is never explained "why" she leaves. But the film gradually shows her cutting herself off socially from everyone she knows, to the point where she'd rather live alone in squalor than at home where bed and meals are already paid for.
So, the ending, on a certain level at least, isn't completely inconsistent with her actions throughout what we see in the film.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: 850 Something Wild (1961)

#47 Post by knives » Mon Mar 16, 2020 8:42 am

I remember some one here asking if The Strange One was any different from this and thus worth seeing. While I can't answer the former question I can definitely answer the later in a strong negative. If half baked Tennessee Williams filtered through the most annoying screaming is your thing maybe you'll enjoy this, but for ridiculous Florida exploitation HGL is a more competent filmmaker.

What's most annoying is that it's easy to see this being turned into a fascinating Jean Genet-Cocteau inspired piece of homo-erotic militant self destruction. It comes close enough to be being good, but can't override a terribly obnoxious opening act. I am glad to see where Cartman got his Ah-thor-ah-tay from though.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: 850 Something Wild (1961)

#48 Post by knives » Mon May 18, 2020 5:11 pm

Colour me surprised and happy that this is a real great and strange film. It improves upon The Strange One, and actually makes me want to reassess it, in a lot of essential areas primarily thanks to Carroll Baker doing an insane amount of work. This is one of the most effective works about isolation and trauma I've seen in part because it is totally bats. The only negative I have for the film is that Carnival of Souls does everything better. If you can forgive Something Wild for not being that masterwork then it becomes easy to be blown away by the affair.

The second half is the hardest to swallow and I'm not sure that needle is threaded, but what it attempts is very interesting to me. The first half establishes her trauma and proceeds to catalog the difficulty she has in interpreting the next step. The second half is an actorly response of therapeutics reminding me of I Am a Ghost though again not as successful thanks to the central metaphor being clumsy. Essentially the film, as made explicit in a dream sequence, tries to place an exercise forward on if she can see men no matter how gross they may be as someone other than her rapist.

To take this portion of the film literally on the level of narrative is to ignore that narrative as an act of expressionism. This isn't a take of Stockholm, but rather freedom from the oppression the world and the mind can place on a person. Meeker is not a man, but every man. His disgusting behavior is a replicate of the gross men the same way the dates are of Hilligoss in Carnival. The movie isn't necessarily logical, but rather represents the emotional movement of the characters.

I don't go over extras much lately, but because of how complicated the ending is I ran to the interview with Garfein which proved very helpful in interpreting the film.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: 850 Something Wild (1961)

#49 Post by therewillbeblus » Mon May 18, 2020 5:46 pm

knives wrote:
Mon May 18, 2020 5:11 pm
To take this portion of the film literally on the level of narrative is to ignore that narrative as an act of expressionism. This isn't a take of Stockholm, but rather freedom from the oppression the world and the mind can place on a person. Meeker is not a man, but every man.
Glad someone else read it this way. I don’t get the hate for this one, and on a strange hybrid plane of oppressive allegory and social-emotional realism it succeeded in spades. I can see how this reading demands a lot of rope, maybe too much for some, but it felt like a default analysis for me though maybe this is just how I approach films. Embracing the situation through the power of the mind as a form of freedom in the space of powerlessness can be viewed as resilient or pathetic, depending on how much one takes the film at face value.

Its spiritual sister film feels like Verhoeven’s Elle, which in some ways takes the opposite approach in the power play but with the same themes behind the curtain. That’s another film that’s almost too contradictory and enigmatic to work but it somehow succeeds in its tightrope walk- and even though I like that film a lot more, I’m surprised this one doesn’t elicit a similar response. Maybe because Huppert is aggressive and self-actualized from the start so it’s more accessible? Though that only makes me more impressed with this one in trying to do what it does without this support.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: 850 Something Wild (1961)

#50 Post by knives » Mon May 18, 2020 5:54 pm

Perhaps. I will admit that I really needed Herr Schrek's comments and Garfein's interview to solidify my feelings on the ending since it is a very shocking sequence. I needed to spend a lot of time thinking what could possibly the motivation for this turn of events? They are uncomfortable because Baker has no power as you say. Still, disgust wouldn't sit with me because the film didn't seem to be treating this as reality in the same way the ghosts in Carnival of Souls aren't reality.

Post Reply