Not THAT antagonistic.
Although the lead actor did throw a glass in a fit that wasn't in the script. Only the actor, director and cameraman knew what was going to happen. Everyone else stayed in character.
I believe I said this was a Best Picture winner, so The Shining is Out.
Â
Every Best Picture winner of the 1970s has been selected by the Library of Congress for inclusion in the National Film Registry for preservation: except this one.
The two main adult characters were supposed to have an antagonistic relationship, so to get his scene partner in character, the lead actor would occasionally drop the name of the lead actress' recently deceased fiance, himself an Oscar nominated actor.
The lead actress won an Oscar for her role. Later that night, she left it in the bathroom at an after party.
The lead actor also won an Oscar. He thanked his ex-wife for preparing him for the role.
One non-winner was for Best Supporting Actor. The child who was nominated was 8. He remains the youngest nominee in any category.
This is possibly the movie with the most Yiddish spoken in the background, and even in the foreground. (As opposed to movies where it was spoken for 1 scene for about 30 seconds, this one has Yiddish in several scenes.) One of those scenes has Yiddish spoken to the Pennsylvania Dutch! Surprising no one, they did not understand any of it.  It also includes a Native American reading Hebrew. ("I did not understand one word.") As a come-from-behind story, it had a strong beginning- the protagonist graduated 87th out of 88 students.
This is possibly the movie with the most Yiddish spoken in the background, and even in the foreground. (As opposed to movies where it was spoken for 1 scene for about 30 seconds, this one has Yiddish in several scenes.) One of those scenes has Yiddish spoken to the Pennsylvania Dutch! Surprising no one, they did not understand any of it.  It also includes a Native American reading Hebrew. ("I did not understand one word.") As a come-from-behind story, it had a strong beginning- the protagonist graduated 87th out of 88 students.
This is possibly the movie with the most Yiddish spoken in the background, and even in the foreground. (As opposed to movies where it was spoken for 1 scene for about 30 seconds, this one has Yiddish in several scenes.) One of those scenes has Yiddish spoken to the Pennsylvania Dutch! Surprising no one, they did not understand any of it.  It also includes a Native American reading Hebrew. ("I did not understand one word.") As a come-from-behind story, it had a strong beginning- the protagonist graduated 87th out of 88 students.
In this movie, there are 2 main actors, one of them fairly famous and the other one very famous. In this movie, the fairly famous one falls sick and is nursed back to health by an Amish/Pennsylvania Dutch community. In a different movie, the very famous actor falls sick and is nursed back to health by an Amish community.
This movie is a PG movie. However, print errors have led a lot of people (myself included) to think it was rated "R" because it was incorrectly labelled in a home movie release.
The "title character" was, technically, accused of a crime he didn't commit. The fairly famous actor had previously played a role where that happened. And he later played 3 more movies with 3 more roles where that happened. (Not counting movies where it didn't happen.)
Â
It has almost the same name as a movie released decades before, but is not connected to it and, other than some similarities in setting, bears no resemblance to the previous movie.
Â
The "title character" has $50 swindled from him, and later goes to collect his $200. This was not an error, nor a lie. He was robbed of $150 after being swindled (only counting his money.)
Â
The sharp-eyed may notice a few errors in the props in the movie, but the average viewer will not (firearms errors, horse errors.) However, any Jew should know the concept of Pikuach nefesh. That is a principle of Jewish law that states that saving a (human) life overrides observation of the Sabbath. So, if your life is in immediate danger, you may travel to escape the immediate danger. If a friend's life is in danger, you may act to defend him. (And defending yourself with violence on the Sabbath is expected.) In each of these cases, an observant Jew is REQUIRED to break the Sabbath because the preservation of human life is preeminent over virtually all other religious rules of Judaism. Someone who knows this may think certain parts of the movie don't make sense.  Then again, in history, there have been devout Jews who observed the Sabbath and did NOT observe Pikuach nefesh- to their own sorrow, so the error may not have been a writing error, but a character error/flaw. The same can be said about how he interprets the Sabbath beginning and ending,
On 2/16/2025 at 12:34 AM, Human without the bean said:
So for my benefit, who is the 8 yr. old kid?
"Kramer Vs Kramer" was about a couple having a divorce. The couple had kids. I saw a piece of the movie. The Dad told a kid to put on his shoes, and the kid showed up in sneakers. The Dad sent him back to change to shoes. The kid insisted he was wearing shoes. "Those are not shoes. Those are shoe substitutes."   So, the couple had at least 1 kid. That's the limit of what I know. Imdb will have more information if you want to follow up on it. Wikipedia also, I think.
This is possibly the movie with the most Yiddish spoken in the background, and even in the foreground. (As opposed to movies where it was spoken for 1 scene for about 30 seconds, this one has Yiddish in several scenes.) One of those scenes has Yiddish spoken to the Pennsylvania Dutch! Surprising no one, they did not understand any of it.  It also includes a Native American reading Hebrew. ("I did not understand one word.") As a come-from-behind story, it had a strong beginning- the protagonist graduated 87th out of 88 students.
In this movie, there are 2 main actors, one of them fairly famous and the other one very famous. In this movie, the fairly famous one falls sick and is nursed back to health by an Amish/Pennsylvania Dutch community. In a different movie, the very famous actor falls sick and is nursed back to health by an Amish community.
This movie is a PG movie. However, print errors have led a lot of people (myself included) to think it was rated "R" because it was incorrectly labelled in a home movie release.
The "title character" was, technically, accused of a crime he didn't commit. The fairly famous actor had previously played a role where that happened. And he later played 3 more movies with 3 more roles where that happened. (Not counting movies where it didn't happen.)
Â
It has almost the same name as a movie released decades before, but is not connected to it and, other than some similarities in setting, bears no resemblance to the previous movie.
Â
The "title character" has $50 swindled from him, and later goes to collect his $200. This was not an error, nor a lie. He was robbed of $150 after being swindled (only counting his money.)
Â
The sharp-eyed may notice a few errors in the props in the movie, but the average viewer will not (firearms errors, horse errors.) However, any Jew should know the concept of Pikuach nefesh. That is a principle of Jewish law that states that saving a (human) life overrides observation of the Sabbath. So, if your life is in immediate danger, you may travel to escape the immediate danger. If a friend's life is in danger, you may act to defend him. (And defending yourself with violence on the Sabbath is expected.) In each of these cases, an observant Jew is REQUIRED to break the Sabbath because the preservation of human life is preeminent over virtually all other religious rules of Judaism. Someone who knows this may think certain parts of the movie don't make sense.  Then again, in history, there have been devout Jews who observed the Sabbath and did NOT observe Pikuach nefesh- to their own sorrow, so the error may not have been a writing error, but a character error/flaw. The same can be said about how he interprets the Sabbath beginning and ending,
Â
I'm sure it's pretty rare for a rabbi to have a bank robber as the best man at his wedding.
I doubt it's The Frisco Kid, but that's the only other movie I can think of with a rabbi main character.
George
Oh, you should never doubt what nobody is sure about.
It IS The Frisco Kid.
Avram's misadventures included help from the Pennsylvania Dutch, being kidnapped by some nice Indians (you'll have to see that scene to do it justice, but there were 2-3 scenes with them, and resting in a monastery. For a rabbi, he spent a lot of the movie encountering people with different beliefs- and was actually helped by each of them. (Even the Indians, who had no reason to trust any Caucasians.)Â Â Avram refused to violate the Sabbath even when it could kill him. It's no shock that he graduated 77th out of 78 students in his yeshivah.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
981
538
1031
268
Popular Days
Oct 12
17
May 25
15
May 12
14
May 8
12
Top Posters In This Topic
GeorgeStGeorge 981 posts
Raf 538 posts
WordWolf 1,031 posts
Human without the bean 268 posts
Popular Days
Oct 12 2018
17 posts
May 25 2021
15 posts
May 12 2014
14 posts
May 8 2014
12 posts
Popular Posts
Human without the bean
Why didn't you say that 2 days ago Mr. Wolf? Your right Rottie, They are pretty good. Makes it tough on me to get my 2 cents in.
Human without the bean
I was way off going with "The Terminal", except that it didn't have any articles of clothing in the title. I assume WordWolf is correct, but I'm not familiar with it. But that's not unusual.
GeorgeStGeorge
Stallone. Also well-known for reprising his Rocky role. I can't see him in Eddie Murphy's role in BHC, though... George
Posted Images
WordWolf
Really young actor, 1970s, main characters antagonistic to each other....
any chance this was "THE SHINING???"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Not THAT antagonistic.
Although the lead actor did throw a glass in a fit that wasn't in the script. Only the actor, director and cameraman knew what was going to happen. Everyone else stayed in character.
I believe I said this was a Best Picture winner, so The Shining is Out.
Â
Â
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Come on, how many Best Picture winners of the 70s feature two antagonistic people and a ypung kid with a role significant enough to get a nomination?
I was hoping this would be a giveaway
Â
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeorgeStGeorge
Paper Moon?
I'm sure if I saw a list of Best Picture winners from the 70s, I could figure it out, but I don't remember the winners from that long ago.
George
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Not Paper Moon
And we can rule out the Godfather I and IIÂ
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeorgeStGeorge
I know Barbara Streisand and Ryan O'Neal starred in a couple of movies in the 70s, but I don't think either got Best Picture.
George
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeorgeStGeorge
It's the young boy thing that's really throwing me. I suspect that his name would make the answer obvious.
George
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Raf:
Every Best Picture winner of the 1970s has been selected by the Library of Congress for inclusion in the National Film Registry for preservation: except this one.
The two main adult characters were supposed to have an antagonistic relationship, so to get his scene partner in character, the lead actor would occasionally drop the name of the lead actress' recently deceased fiance, himself an Oscar nominated actor.
The lead actress won an Oscar for her role. Later that night, she left it in the bathroom at an after party.
The lead actor also won an Oscar. He thanked his ex-wife for preparing him for the role.
One non-winner was for Best Supporting Actor. The child who was nominated was 8. He remains the youngest nominee in any category.
==========================================
Moving the clue to this page.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I'm wondering if the kid was playing a banjo and... no, lead actor and a lead actress in an antagonistic relationship.
Â
And a kid was in the movie.
*thinks*
Â
Oh!
How about "KRAMER VS KRAMER"?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Meryl Streep was engaged to John Cazale [Fredo from The Godfather] when he died. Dustin Hoffman kept name dropping him to get Streep to not like him.
Streep won an Oscar and left it in the turlet.
You're up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
This is possibly the movie with the most Yiddish spoken in the background, and even in the foreground. (As opposed to movies where it was spoken for 1 scene for about 30 seconds, this one has Yiddish in several scenes.) One of those scenes has Yiddish spoken to the Pennsylvania Dutch! Surprising no one, they did not understand any of it.  It also includes a Native American reading Hebrew. ("I did not understand one word.") As a come-from-behind story, it had a strong beginning- the protagonist graduated 87th out of 88 students.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Human without the bean
So for my benefit, who is the 8 yr. old kid?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeorgeStGeorge
Yentl?
George
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
No, although I suppose both had quite a bit of Yiddish in them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
This is possibly the movie with the most Yiddish spoken in the background, and even in the foreground. (As opposed to movies where it was spoken for 1 scene for about 30 seconds, this one has Yiddish in several scenes.) One of those scenes has Yiddish spoken to the Pennsylvania Dutch! Surprising no one, they did not understand any of it.  It also includes a Native American reading Hebrew. ("I did not understand one word.") As a come-from-behind story, it had a strong beginning- the protagonist graduated 87th out of 88 students.
In this movie, there are 2 main actors, one of them fairly famous and the other one very famous. In this movie, the fairly famous one falls sick and is nursed back to health by an Amish/Pennsylvania Dutch community. In a different movie, the very famous actor falls sick and is nursed back to health by an Amish community.
This movie is a PG movie. However, print errors have led a lot of people (myself included) to think it was rated "R" because it was incorrectly labelled in a home movie release.
The "title character" was, technically, accused of a crime he didn't commit. The fairly famous actor had previously played a role where that happened. And he later played 3 more movies with 3 more roles where that happened. (Not counting movies where it didn't happen.)
Â
It has almost the same name as a movie released decades before, but is not connected to it and, other than some similarities in setting, bears no resemblance to the previous movie.
Â
The "title character" has $50 swindled from him, and later goes to collect his $200. This was not an error, nor a lie. He was robbed of $150 after being swindled (only counting his money.)
Â
The sharp-eyed may notice a few errors in the props in the movie, but the average viewer will not (firearms errors, horse errors.) However, any Jew should know the concept of Pikuach nefesh. That is a principle of Jewish law that states that saving a (human) life overrides observation of the Sabbath. So, if your life is in immediate danger, you may travel to escape the immediate danger. If a friend's life is in danger, you may act to defend him. (And defending yourself with violence on the Sabbath is expected.) In each of these cases, an observant Jew is REQUIRED to break the Sabbath because the preservation of human life is preeminent over virtually all other religious rules of Judaism. Someone who knows this may think certain parts of the movie don't make sense.  Then again, in history, there have been devout Jews who observed the Sabbath and did NOT observe Pikuach nefesh- to their own sorrow, so the error may not have been a writing error, but a character error/flaw. The same can be said about how he interprets the Sabbath beginning and ending,
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
"Kramer Vs Kramer" was about a couple having a divorce. The couple had kids. I saw a piece of the movie. The Dad told a kid to put on his shoes, and the kid showed up in sneakers. The Dad sent him back to change to shoes. The kid insisted he was wearing shoes. "Those are not shoes. Those are shoe substitutes."   So, the couple had at least 1 kid. That's the limit of what I know. Imdb will have more information if you want to follow up on it. Wikipedia also, I think.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeorgeStGeorge
Witness?
George
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
That is not this movie.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
This is possibly the movie with the most Yiddish spoken in the background, and even in the foreground. (As opposed to movies where it was spoken for 1 scene for about 30 seconds, this one has Yiddish in several scenes.) One of those scenes has Yiddish spoken to the Pennsylvania Dutch! Surprising no one, they did not understand any of it.  It also includes a Native American reading Hebrew. ("I did not understand one word.") As a come-from-behind story, it had a strong beginning- the protagonist graduated 87th out of 88 students.
In this movie, there are 2 main actors, one of them fairly famous and the other one very famous. In this movie, the fairly famous one falls sick and is nursed back to health by an Amish/Pennsylvania Dutch community. In a different movie, the very famous actor falls sick and is nursed back to health by an Amish community.
This movie is a PG movie. However, print errors have led a lot of people (myself included) to think it was rated "R" because it was incorrectly labelled in a home movie release.
The "title character" was, technically, accused of a crime he didn't commit. The fairly famous actor had previously played a role where that happened. And he later played 3 more movies with 3 more roles where that happened. (Not counting movies where it didn't happen.)
Â
It has almost the same name as a movie released decades before, but is not connected to it and, other than some similarities in setting, bears no resemblance to the previous movie.
Â
The "title character" has $50 swindled from him, and later goes to collect his $200. This was not an error, nor a lie. He was robbed of $150 after being swindled (only counting his money.)
Â
The sharp-eyed may notice a few errors in the props in the movie, but the average viewer will not (firearms errors, horse errors.) However, any Jew should know the concept of Pikuach nefesh. That is a principle of Jewish law that states that saving a (human) life overrides observation of the Sabbath. So, if your life is in immediate danger, you may travel to escape the immediate danger. If a friend's life is in danger, you may act to defend him. (And defending yourself with violence on the Sabbath is expected.) In each of these cases, an observant Jew is REQUIRED to break the Sabbath because the preservation of human life is preeminent over virtually all other religious rules of Judaism. Someone who knows this may think certain parts of the movie don't make sense.  Then again, in history, there have been devout Jews who observed the Sabbath and did NOT observe Pikuach nefesh- to their own sorrow, so the error may not have been a writing error, but a character error/flaw. The same can be said about how he interprets the Sabbath beginning and ending,
Â
I'm sure it's pretty rare for a rabbi to have a bank robber as the best man at his wedding.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeorgeStGeorge
I doubt it's The Frisco Kid, but that's the only other movie I can think of with a rabbi main character.
George
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Oh, you should never doubt what nobody is sure about.
It IS The Frisco Kid.
Avram's misadventures included help from the Pennsylvania Dutch, being kidnapped by some nice Indians (you'll have to see that scene to do it justice, but there were 2-3 scenes with them, and resting in a monastery. For a rabbi, he spent a lot of the movie encountering people with different beliefs- and was actually helped by each of them. (Even the Indians, who had no reason to trust any Caucasians.)Â Â Avram refused to violate the Sabbath even when it could kill him. It's no shock that he graduated 77th out of 78 students in his yeshivah.
Â
Go, George!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.