IN THE HEAT OF THE NIGHT REACTION/REVIEW!!
Vložit
- čas přidán 3. 05. 2024
- Hello everyone!!!! Welcome to But Did You Like It Reactions! Thank you for supporting us and we hope you have a great time! Comment down below to let us know what you would like to see!!
Visit the channel here to see what we have uploaded!
/ @butdidyoulikeitreactions
For Exclusive Content and To Support Our Channel, Please Subscribe To Our Patreon at: / butdidyoulikeitreactions
Sid's Instagram:
@Sidp221199
Hunter's Instagram:
@Hunter_Boyle_
Thanks for supporting and stopping by! - Krátké a kreslené filmy
Rod Steiger, who played Sheriff Gillespie, won best actor of the year. He's nothing like it in real life - completely different accent. Amazing actor. The story really wasn't about the mystery. It was about a period of time in the south. It wasn't that the chief was "all right." It's that there is hope for him. I think if you watch it again, you will find that there was development with the chief. It was subtle, but it was there.
Rod Steiger deserved the award, BUT it's a shame that Sidney Poitier wasn't even nominated for an Oscar (Best Actor or Best Supporting Actor) and IMO should have won one!
"What kind of people are you?!" "What kind of place is this?!" The best line in the movie.
Fun fact that's kind of surprising: Poitier and Steiger were basically the same age (born 1927 vs. '25).
I found your reaction interesting. I saw this movie when it first cam out (I’m 69). My comments are you must take a step back and realize the makeup of 1967. The hole context of walt was going on was completely different. For example, the movie was depicted in the (deep south) was filmed no wear near the deep south (in fact it was filmed in Illinois). Not because it was cheaper but because Sidney Poitier and others had real concerns about the safety of the actors and the protection people who might go see the movie in a deep south movie theater of the late 60s. hard to picture something like that in 2024 back in 1967 it was a real concern. Remember MLK was still alive when the movie came out and was murdered one year later. Think about it.
18:48 "DNA sample?" -Sid
about 20 years too soon, thank you for stepping in Hunter.
The acting of Sidney Poitier and Rod Steiger is off the wall. I saw this movie when it first came out, it never gets old.
I think you guys missed the point of the film. The mystery of who killed Colbert is secondary. The primary point of the story is the development of the relationship between Tibbs and the Sheriff. This is one of the all-time great films. It has tremendous re-watchability thanks to great acting. The fight scene was perfectly fine. I'm not sure what you were expecting. It's not a Kung Fu movie. It is however the winner of five Academy Awards including "Best Picture of 1968."
exactly. too much talking over dialogue not focused watching listening understanding
I think part of the problem is that you guys are expecting this to be more like it is today (not that today is perfect in any way shape or form). While the mid 60s was before my time, I learned about it from the movies my parents watched (both of them born in 1929). Two of my Mom's favorite movies were Guess Who's Coming to Dinner & In the Heat of the Night, both starring Sydney Poitier. I remember seeing her face break into a hige grin when he'd say back authoritatively "They call me Mr Tibbs!"
Anyways, this movie doesn't show things how they should be, it shows them how they were, and that's what makes it more powerful. To see a person like Gillespie change from beginning to the end shows that change does come, but never as fast as we'd like it. It takes time, but the really important things usually do. And honestly we're still not there yet, in fact I think we took a few hundred steps back starting in 2016, but it just means we have to work that much harder to get there.
I disagree. That smile was needed at the ending. Tibbs made HUGE progress with that sheriff, and the sheriff had changed his mind. A victory for civil rights. Remakes are usually crap. This movie was a masterpiece, as is.
The Miranda ruling occurred in June 1966. Screenwriting and early production on the film started in 1965 and it was released in 67.
Considering writing, filming, and post production like editing, scoring, marketing and distribution, etc., reading rights was not a common concept yet.
Your reactions to this film almost took me back to my high school days in Brooklyn, New York.. 1967 when I first saw this film in the movie theater. Powerful emotions expressed by both of you. Thanks for sharing this experience here on CZcams!
Me too, up in Rochester. I was 16. Back in 1961, when the first black family moved into our all-white neighborhood neighborhood, there was a hell of an upheaval. But the new family had more supporters than detractors, so they moved in and immediately had a circle of friends standing by them. My family was one of them. Three years later, one of the first of the "long, hot summers" occurred. It was an extremely tense time, as I'm sure you remember.
Gillespie had some redeeming qualities. He was trapped by culture, and situation. His was the highest regard for Virgil near the end. Note the final sendoff - that is the ONLY time in the film, that you see Rod Steiger smile! This film gets better with every viewing. RIP Sidney Poitier and Rod Steiger, and thank you! This film took the Oscars.
Hunter Boyle is breathtaking!! Such deep bright eyes 😍😍😍😍
Good for people of color to react to this movie....not too many reactions to it on CZcams. 😀
This is a really good movie with a good anti-racist message. 😀Remember, these guys are just acting...the guy who plays the sheriff isn't racist at all IRL, and he's not from the south. 😀
The TV show was also very good, I watched it religiously in high school (I graduated 1996). The TV show was not as good when the guy playing Mr. Tibbs had to leave....apparently he had a drug problem. But the lady who played his wife -- Ann-Marie Johnson, who was also on In Living Color, Melrose Place and many other things -- said that the racist town where they recorded the show made her feel very uncomfortable...she grew up in Los Angeles, and she said there were a lot of racists in that small town. 😮
There's a reason why those of us in the "blue states" -- the anti-Trump states -- as well as the major cities within the red states, avoid areas like that! Ignorant racists. 😮 I grew up in the San Francisco Bay Area, and still live here, and I wouldn't go to a state like that unless I'm visiting a national park! 😮
btw -- there was a sequel to this movie called They Call Me Mr. Tibbs, where he goes to San Francisco, my area! 🙂I haven't seen the sequel yet, though! 🙂 He was also in a movie called Look Who's Coming to Dinner, where he is marrying a white woman, and has to deal with some racism from the woman's father, and his own father wants him to marry a black woman. 🙂
P.S.I'm now a new subscriber to your channel, Hunter and Sid 😎
Did you note the year methods and tech was not known then.
I was checking to see if someone was going to mention this. Forensics in the mid 60s isn't the same as it is now. If it were, the Son of Sam might've been caught quicker, and the Zodiac murders might've actually been solved.
I don't know if you've seen it, but comedian John Mulaney does a bit about old time cop shows and their lack of forensics.
"Detective, we found a pool of the killer's blood in the hallway."
"Hmm, gross. Mop it up. Now then, back to my hunch."
There was a very popular TV series that lasted more than 5 years starring Howard Rollins and Carrol O'Conner.
Per the calendar in Chief Gillespie's office, this is set in September of 1966. The United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in _Miranda versus Arizona_ on 13 June 1966.
Back when SCOTUS was making victories for mankind instead of embarrassing it.
For the youtube algos, I have 'Liked' your upload and commented on it. With that being written, I suggest you guys don't react to any additional movies made prior to... maybe 2009 or so. The less-than-modern virtues of the characters, would only distract you from enjoying the actual movie. Take care.
I hated the racism in the story, but it did a good job of putting us in the lens of that place and in the time. But it I think this feature was progress, as to bring to light, how things actually were, in the small towns in America. I am half Japanese, I lived in Kentucky and Indiana, I experienced that in the 1970s till we moved to California.
It's a shame that Sidney Poitier wasn't even nominated for an Oscar (Best Actor or Best Supporting Actor) and IMO should have won one!
20:03 🤣🤣🤣🤣 omg, Hunter's lips are moving so it looks like _she's_ say the dialogue.
too funny.
This is an important film for many reasons. It came out during the height of Civil Rights issues and shows both the old social system, particularly of the South, and the dawning of the new. It showed that social change will take place person by person but that institutions must model the highest legal and ethical laws, regardless of how citizens or society in general behaves.
Technically, it came up with techniques so that the lighting and camerawork on dark skin looked as beautiful or powerful as light skin. The famous “slap” was a groundbreaking first in American cinema and was specifically written into the script at the insistence of Sidney Poitier.
Many of the characters are flawed, stupid or cruel but the point of art is not to always show “perfect” people who never say the wrong thing, but to show reality in a time or place, or the journey which people make as a character arc, while they change, however small or subtle that change might be.
I was 7 yrs old when my parents took us to ABC DRIVE INN in Fort Washington, MD. in 1967. I was not interested in the movie at all. Until Tibbs and Endicott slapped each other and my mother let out a bone chilling scream and my father started the car and reached for his pistol. It was a mad rush as many cars kicked up dust heading for the exit. It was 1975 before I ever saw the end of this movie.
OMG I used to live near there!!! I remember the ABC Drive In!!! Used to go there with my mom sometimes and I was so young I actually watched the movie and didn't know what the teenage couples were doing all around us.
Excellent reaction
Can you guys react to (BlackBoard Jungle) or Guess Who's Coming to Dinner ?
Two films starring Sidney Poitier.
Thank you for posting.
Sorry, but that fight scene is really realistic. Not hollywood like. Four against one. Sidney Poitier does everything right!!!!!! No heroics.
16:54 "I don't know enough about your mother to hate her." -Sid
😆 Hunter's mom is great, she recommended this movie. 👍🏼
5:52 "but even then, for black people it was a different year." -Hunter
😆
4:41 "ok Barney Fife." -Hunter
aww, Barney wouldn't do that.
I love this movie. I absolutely love this movie. Steiger and Poitier are excellent together. It's a shame more folks don't react to it.
Once upon a time I hoped for a remake starring Gene Hackman and Denzel Washington. But the time for that has long since passed. Too bad. I think it could have been great.
The film is 55 years old you looking at a 2024 perspective things have changed so much you have to put your mind set in 1967
YO! Barney Fife would never!
You realize if they did everything you suggested there would be no movie.
And it would not have been realistic for the time.
I think i was in my mid 20s when I first saw this movie. I saw the TV show as a teenager, but I was well aware of the original movie.This a very, great and classic movie. I have to respectfully disagree with many of your observations.
The plot twist at the end. Plot twists seems to be an issue younger generations have with older movies. If the plot was just about Endicott having Colbert killed, then the movie would've played out a lot differently. Considering that this was the 1960s South, Endicott being the killer or having a part in the killing would totally obvious. Plot twists are make movies and TV shows interesting because they come out of nowhere. Ralph is just that unassuming guy. I guess in a way, with him always snapping that rubber band he had, that was a bit of foreshadowing to show that Ralph had some kind of physical side to him.
Nuance. That seems to be another problem younger generations have with older movies. Because some of the characters were developed more, you couldn't catch the nuance in how they are. To say that Rod Steiger's role as the Chief wasn't good as well does the movie justice. It's puzzling to me that you both don't see the gradual change in the Chief. The change started when he was receptive to Virgil working on the case after talking to Virgil's chief. Even with Virgil going to the Chief's house, it shows the continual self-reflection. I think you both took the scene wrong when the Chief "No thank you black boy". The Chief acknowledged that while there were things wrong in his life and he was lonely, recognized that part of it was his own doing, as why he didn't want any pity. Virgil isn't Mr. Clean himself. Virgil was projecting as well with the "I'm better than any white man" trope, which the Chief used to convince Virgil to stay. If Virgil didn't have that mindset, he wouldn't have been able to slap Endicott and smirk afterwards. But it came back at him in that next seen when he and the Chief are talking outside. The Chief realized that deep down, Virgil is basically the same as the Chief and everyone else there. And what does Virgil do? He pauses, because he is self-reflecting. If the Chief had not been self-reflecting, he would've seen it. That needed to happen before Virgil could start to change. This is why I can't agree with you two about how the ending should've been. All that self-reflection for the Chief and Virgil would've gone down the drain if neither one smiled at each other. The plot change from the obvious Endicott and everything leading up to Ralph, would've gone down the drain.
The fight scene...if you want to call it that😄 It was the 1960s...that is what you are to expect. Did you think you were going to see a Denzel Washington reboot The Equalizer fight scene? Nope. And it wouldn't have been realistic as far as police training. The way the angels were shot were for emphasize each person for the suspense. So, it's no big deal to focus so much on the fight scene. But...I do agree that those guys were sorry as hell. A gang of thugs who can't thug 😅.
It doesn't need to be remade. From the way you two want it to be remade, then you are asking for a Rated R movie, which this movie is Rated PG. And even if it was made PG today, which it would be PG-13, much of the meaning, context and nuance would be lost in order for it to be "more gritty" as you said. I see that as a reflection of how life is today. I'm not so sure that the plot twist in the original would go over well in modern times and I'm not so sure that the changes in the Chief would be as accepted, much less be believable to a modern audience.
In The Heat of The Night had many future TV and film stars other than Sidney Poitier and Rod Steiger. The actor that played Sam Wood had a very good career before and after. 2 of the future movies he's know for in the 1980s is the comedy Stripes and the police movie Blue Thunder (this is a movie you definitely need to review). In Blue Thunder, he plays a LAPD police captain. He died in 1981. Blue Thunder and another movie that he starred in that were made in 1981 were released until 1983. The actor that played Harvey, he's well-known for being the Demi Moore movie G.I. Jane and in The Walking Dead.
$162.39 per week in 1967 would be $1527.51 per week in 2024.
Great movie ... horrible seeing this reaction.
They're young. In a few years, they may rewatch this film and grow to appreciate it better.
@buffstraw2969 Yes, indeed. Patience.
@@franchk8372 🙂
11:58 it makes for a much better reaction when it's the first time for you both. but that's just, like, my opinion, man.
I agree :)
YOUR REVOLUTION IS OVER! CONDOLENCES! THE BUMS LOST!
Once i heard i'm already pissed off at this movie, i 'd had enough. A classic movie and one of the best films ever made ruined..
Yeah, I couldn't finish their reaction either. They don't get it.....yet. I would have been the same way when I was much younger. There's a wise elder saying "I'm not young enough to know everything".
a remake???? why?... you can't reproduce that moment in time. the environment, the setting. .the great acting... the civil rights era of the 60's was one of the MAIN characters of the film. how the heck do you re=create that in today's world?? you don't. this film captures a moment in time.
I love how this film, or indeed any film reaction, reveals far more about the reactors than the characters depicted in the film.
You guys display precisely the same emotionally driven prejudices & bigotries towards the characters as the characters themselves, - by not listening, & engaging with your preset judgements of certain demographics in order to project, - rather than to listen, observe, & engage with the character's where they are, & the environment in which they grew up.
That's how the seeds of racism & bigotry begin. It's easy to succumb if we're not careful, isn't it? Especially if we are surrounded by others of the same mindset, who never pull us up about it to help self reflection.
Virgil occasionally succumbed to the same prejudices until he blocked his emotional investment by engaging his reason & logic.
Any one of us can & will occasionally submit to prejudice. & whenever you run into it, prejudice always obscures the truth, & the ability to listen, relate, & understand other people.
Gillespie, by the end of the film was able to lay down some of the innate prejudices of his environment by listening, respecting, & relating.
'People are born ignorant. Not stupid.
We only become stupid by education & indoctrination'
Bertrand Russell. 1872-1970.
And it has been proven in studies that everyone is prejudice toward "others" in some way, but knowing that can help us correct for it.
@Vlasko60 Very true. Perhaps it is intrinsically part of our animal nature for survival..
We have an instinctual attraction to people or animals that display a warm, easy-going nature on first contact.
& an instinctual antithesis & aversion to beings that seem to give off anti-social or abrasive vibes on the first meeting. Regardless of race, colour, gender, attractiveness, or even species!
We know when a dog is friendly & approachable, wagging its tail like crazy with an open mouth & tongue lolling out that we can approach & pet.
& we know when we get a cold, silent, baleful look that we are being warned off from approaching & should keep our distance.
We need those instincts to survive. 80% of all communication is non-verbal even in humans.
100% in animals.
We rely heavily on reading these cues.
People send out those same signals all the time with precisely the same effect on us.
If we don't learn very quickly when to steer clear, we are leaving ourselves wide open to danger.
I kind of enjoy your reaction, but you talk too much over the actors. It would be better if you just commented once in awhile. and not talking over the actors.
history is certainly NOT a strength of either of you. every hear of the civil rights movement. perhaps you should look into it. you spent this entire reaction trying to view this film by today's standards. which is completely ridiculous. and speaking over the entire film and missing VIRTUALLY ALL OF THE DIALOGUE absolutely robbed you of seeing seeing brilliant acting at the highest level. as someone mentioned earlier....perhaps you should simply avoid watching films before the 2000's. they are simply going to go RIGHT OVER YOUR HEAD. maybe stick to marvel movies and the like. the simpler the better... high drama is clearly NOT your cup of tea...
You are a bit harsher in my view of how they reviewed the movie, but you are right. They were looking at the movie through today's standards. The speaking over the scenes to where they missed a lot of the context and nuance was a big issue for me. Now if there is more on the full Patreon version that clears them up, that sucks in a way. Because if we are missing everything that they are saying, then that means the editing of the review video is lacking a little. And that's an issue I have with all content creators that have the edited version and then the full uncut Patreon version. But, I can understand why the uncut version is on Patreon.
and trying to make every scene funny somehow so you two could chuckle was also very annoying to watch. if you are that awkward watching a film together, then perhaps don't..
You guys are idiots....one of the best movies ever.
mildly irritating reaction to a seminal movie, but I suppose if you have no feel for the time in which this movie is set, then you can be forgiven to some extent for your lack of appreciation.