MovieChat Forums > Some Came Running (1958) Discussion > Is it just me?

Is it just me?

posted 15 years ago by CindyH
33 replies | jump to latest

I watched last night's Sinatra marathon on TCM until 3 in the morning. I had only seen a couple of his movies before, and I really tried to keep a serious open mind about him, but it didn't help.

Is it just me or is Sinatra really dull, in the movies? I don't see the attraction to him at all. His acting isn't all that and from what I can tell, the only movie he really seemed to really act in was From Here to Eternity and to be honest, I don't think he even needed to act. He just needed to be himself.

I cannot see why Ginnie was attracted to him, nor any of his leading ladies. I just don't see the talent. His only talent, I'll grant him, is his singing and not even all of that interests me either. However, I can see why his singing was so popular. I can at least see that talent.

Can anyone enlighten me on him? What am I missing?

ETA: This probably belongs on the Sinatra board, but I think that his biased fans will likely not try and explain it to me. That's why I posted here.

[–] giverny98 15 years ago

My assumption is that you had to be of that generation to get it. My mother STILL thinks he's dreamy. Me? Not so much.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] IForgotMyMantra 15 years ago

If you only saw Sinatra in this movie, it'd be hard to believe he was such a star.

[–] CindyH 15 years ago

That's very true, but I've seen him in several and I'm still scratching my head.

[–] CindyH 15 years ago

Sorry this is so long in coming. I never ever got a notice, oddly enough, until today that there was ever a response. That's very unusual for IMDb.

I'm not sure it really is the generation though. I mean, I'm not of any of the earlier generations (I'm 42) but I adore Cary Grant, James Stewart, Humprey Bogart and others who came even before Sinatra. I just still don't get it.

Personally, his singing is only so-so. Now of that genre, I think Tony Bennett is far superior. In fact, I love to listen to him.

Oh well. I guess I'll just never understand it.

Thanks so much for your input!

[–] SonicAndy 15 years ago

I don't like Sinatra as a singer at all, but he's made some really good movies. I can recommend the Man With The Golden Arm, and Suddenly.

"I'm a gentleman's gentleman, and you're no bloody gentleman !"

[–] CindyH 15 years ago

Now those two I've not seen. I'll have to add that to my list to see. Thanks for sharing!

[–] Ironman54 10 years ago

If you've never seen 'Von Ryan's Express' (1965) catch that one too - another WW II movie
(allied POWs escape from prison camp). I love movies that have/incorporate trains in the story so I might be a little biased here ... One of my favorite Sinatra flicks at any rate.

[–] phlbrq 15 years ago

I'm not a true Sinatra fan so I think I can dispassionately offer some screen Sinatra observations and context.
The thing that infuses Sinatra's talent, screen and song, is his vulnerability to love. This is a career that informed America what it meant to be a man. One cannot experience Sinatra's work without engaging in some dialog about manliness, attitudes towards women, and self discovery through romance. In this film his character says all girls are pretty and we take this as chivalrous and true to his character's belief. This performance along with Manchurian Candidate are his best and I think illustrate my point best. Sinatra could suffer a broken heart on such a grand scale that he informs my faith in the existence of romantic love and its absence leading to self destruction.
It's all about being an American guy, hiding the poet within but openly admiring the poetic values, being tough but vulnerable dissapating ones talent until the right one comes along.

[–] CindyH 14 years ago

Very good points, all of those. The only thing though, for me, is that Sinatra doesn't really exude manliness in my opinion, , but clearly there are a lot of women who thought so.

[–] panchro-press 13 years ago

Obviously, some people are blind, some tone-deaf. Some are both.
-30-

[–] Interlepos (1807) 3 years ago

>> Sinatra could suffer a broken heart on such a grand scale that he informs my faith in the existence of romantic love and its absence leading to self destruction.

Very perceptive.

[–] CindyH 14 years ago

Sinatra was a very ugly man with a great voice.

That's actually very funny. What you say too is very true. I had not even thought about the story in that way. Thank you for pointing this out.

[–] out-of-towner 14 years ago

Like you, I'm not sure why Sinatra was so popular, but he was one of the first singers that teenagers went nuts over. 20 years before Beatle-mania there was Sinatra-mania.

[–] CindyH 14 years ago

Another good point. I wonder who came before him?

[–] soneill 14 years ago

Rudy Vallee, Russ Columbo and of course Bing Crosby, who felt Sinatra breathing down his neck, the same way Sinatra felt about Bobby Darin.

[–] CindyH 13 years ago

Rudy Vallee, Russ Columbo and of course Bing Crosby

Vallee and Crosby?! Right! Duh! I can't believe I missed those. Although Bing was still big for many years after, so I guess that's how I slipped on that one.

Admittedly, I'm not familiar with Russ Columbo. Oops.

Spare me your 6th grade Michael Moore logic! ~ Secretary Heller; 24, Day 4, 7:30:00 a.m.

[–] maggimae83 10 years ago

I grew up in the 50s and Sinatra was the heart throb of the day. Although I did hear that his press agent hired bobby soxers to go to his concerts to scream and swoon. And you are right about Bobby Darin breathing down his neck. Bobby was the heart throb of my day. He had a lot of talent and it is such a shame that he died so young.

maggimae83

[–] soneill 14 years ago

Instead of accusing Sinatra of being dull on the screen, realize that you just don't have receptors for Sinatra in general. Why should you? This is no reflection on your taste or intelligence or on Frank's acting or singing. I am a huge Sinatroid, but I cannot stand Monty Python, the Muppets, Nascar, football, opera, the painter Kandinsky,John Laroquette, any of that Lord of the Rings genre, even the beloved Harry Potter, to name a few. Each of them leaves me cold, but zillions of other people adore them and get a great deal out of what they have to offer.

Since you asked, to me Sinatra in a recording studio in his Capitol years is a genius--a tough, tender, utterly open man who is not afraid of showing his soft spots. He does nothing to protect himself from the material, unlike many other performers who begin to play it safe once they've made it big. Sinatra the actor came off to his directors as an impatient guy because he hated doing more than one take. I attribute this not to laziness but to his rightful awe of the ephemeral. He was one who saw a role as a chef sees a pie crust: handle it too much and you'll ruin it.

If good acting can be described as truthful behavior in imaginary circumstances, Frank was a very good actor, who could have been a great one if he had wanted to. As Humphrey Bogart once said of Spencer Tracy's acting:
"He means what he says when he says it, and if you think that's easy, try it."

p.s. You still don't have to like or "get" Sinatra, as far I'm concerned. There are much more important things to fret about in this world, God knows.

[–] CindyH 12 years ago

Sorry this is so late in coming. Apparently I've missed some reply notices.

I would really love to agree with you in that it's just me "not having Sinatra receptors" (a very excellent description), but I'm not sure that is truly the case.

I'm fairly unbiased when it comes to these things. For example I hate Tom Hanks. Don't even get me started on that man. There is nothing admirable in him at all and even his voice gets on my nerves now. It's SO bad that I can no longer even watch Toy Story, BUT I have to give him credit. He is an excellent actor. I don't have Tom Hanks receptors, but I can see the talent. I can safely say that I have the exact same feelings about Susan Sarandon too.

I'm sure that as a fan you see him differently and that's very good. We all have folks that we love and wish to defend. I just don't believe Sinatra had the acting talent. It's been a long time since I originally posted this and I've had time to reflect. I've come to the conclusion that he was a good singer which in turn made him look good on film.

When we really admire someone, we overlook their faults. You pointed out above how popular Sinatra was, a teen heart throb type of thing, and to see him move to film was likely very exciting. Then to see him play not so nice parts was probably even more exciting.

We get to see actors acting all the time. We can see them be funny, be sad, be angry or even be hateful. The problem is that we don't get to see singers do any of this. We hear the voice and dream of what he (or she) would be like never really knowing.

But then, when they appear on TV or in movies, it's very exciting. We finally get to see him or her in various situations, to learn about them in a sense. For this reason, rather than recognizing any actual talent, it is just a general appreciation of watching the man himself.

As for his fans today, many probably grew up knowing how much their parents adored him. It's like comfort food, it brings back warm memories. A lot of us remember certain scents, like Granmother's cookies baking in the oven, and when we smell something similar it's relaxing. That's only one sensory and as a nurse I'm a firm believer that all our senses cause a similar reaction. Sound is one, so if we hear a familiar song it's comforting and so on.

Granted, that's just my opinion and who am I? I'm no one, lol! It's just that there are - and were - plenty of great actors out there. Some actors, such as Sinatra were successful, but lacking talent. A perfect example of a female Sinatra would be Marilyn Monroe. She had one talent all right, and it didn't have anything to do with acting.

[–] thecallalilies 13 years ago

From Here to Eternity was the best performance he ever gave. This is an interesting film, but it's not his best work.

I'm watching this movie for the second time, and I'm not enjoying it as much as I did before. His mood changes are too abrupt. In a better actor, they'd be more subtle and gradual I think.

... are in bloom again

[–] CindyH 13 years ago

I'm watching this movie for the second time, and I'm not enjoying it as much as I did before.

Well you're one up on me. I didn't like this movie the first time around.

I think it would have been better if Johnny Fontane had done it.

Spare me your 6th grade Michael Moore logic! ~ Secretary Heller; 24, Day 4, 7:30:00 a.m.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]