• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by slaytonf

  1. 12 hours ago, TikiSoo said:

    Wow. Sounds like Les Baxter music. Incredible costuming - are those pieces appliqués or attached to moleskin? Whatever, it certainly leaves little to the imagination.

    You know, it don't matter much to me whether it's on a body stocking or not.  It seems more likely to inspire imagination than defeat it.

    • Thanks 1

  2. And my point was to highlight the increasing pressure to politicize the message boards coming with the recurrent madness that possesses the country.  Why these boards would be targeted is beyond me.

  3. You're right.  It looks like it's been scrubbed from all the drop down menus on other pages except for the one on the MESSAGE BOARDS page (except on my old version of Safari, it pops up on the TCM homepage, too).  But though the page comes up, the link to sign in is disabled.  You will notice there is no record of recently suggested movies, either, only an error message.

  4. There is no standard, or agency that promotes one.  There might be as many methods as there are people who care to measure movies.  I think most would agree that a movie's time runs from the first logo to when the last credit crawls up off the top of the screen.  There are different released versions of many movies, some famously, some from country to country.  During the production code era states and even individual projectionists would take it upon themselves to edit out parts of movies they found objectionable, leading to myriad different prints.  How many of those remain I'm not sure, but if you are attentive, you can see where bits of dialogue too racy or otherwise have been clipped out.

  5. There are four basic schematics which account for all stories that are told.  The one that forms the basis for most stories is:

    --Things start out right, then they go wrong, then they are made right again.

    Two variations are:

    --Things are wrong, then they are made right.  And--

    --Things are right, then they go wrong.

    The first is the basis for comedy, the second for tragedy.

    A final schematic is the inverse of the first:

    --Things are wrong, then they are made right, then they go wrong.

    It is employed in more modern works, particularly in ones crafted to highlight the failures of contemporary society.

    Stories may have added elaborations and embellishments on these basic forms to lengthen the works and increase dramatic tension, but they can all be reduced to the above forms.

    Two final schematics are possible:

    Things are right, and they stay right.

    Things are wrong, and they stay wrong.

    These are rare and mainly form the basis for absurdist, nihilistic, or angry man (woman) stories.


    • Thanks 1

  6. 7 hours ago, thomasterryjr said:

    I normally do not bother to read all of the pages of a thread when it goes six and ten pages.  So I had time on my hands and I was surprised to see that nobody in TCM Nation did not acknowledge the last scene in Charlie Chaplin's "City Lights" as a great moment in Cinema. 

    To refresh your memory, the Tramp has just been released from jail and he is walking down the street when he passes by the flower shop where the blind girl which he had been assisting financially in getting an operation to gain her eyesight.  He stares in the window at her and she, not knowing that the Tramp is the benefactor for her cured eye-sight operation, laughs at him and then tries to coax him into taking a flower she is offering him.  She comes outside to hand the flower to him, the Tramp turns and attempts to walk away, she takes his hand to give him the flower and she instantly knows by touching his hand that this was the man who helped her in getting her eyesight.  The look of surprise on her face when she realizes that he was the one who helped her pay for the eye operation to cure her blindness, afterwards the shot of the Tramp's face before the picture slowly fades to black.  The End.  The background music soundtrack makes this scene even more powerful and one of the most emotionally breath-taking scenes ever film.  

    Well you are a TCM citizen and have done your duty by acknowledging him.  For which I thank you.  There is certainly a lot of his work that could be cited here.  (Hmm. . . .).

    Charlie Chaplin had a tendency to the sentimental.  His great genius saved him from the saccharine.  His delicate understanding of the human character makes this scene both beautiful and painful.  The the impulses for generosity and selflessness, the interplay and shyness and desire for exposure, combine to make this culminating moment.


    • Like 1

  7. 11 hours ago, spence said:

    strill, I just can't get intr it due to the dialogue, anyone else?

    Many of me like Shakespeare.  Without a doubt the greatest author in the English language.  And there are not many in other languages to compare.  I read his plays every handful of years or so.  The problem you and many others have in appreciating him is natural.  His English is four hundred years old.  Meanings and usages have changed.  The best way to experience his work is to see it performed on stage.  Even if you don't get all the words, the intent and power come through.  Reading him takes time to accustom yourself to the language.  I use an annotated version of his plays, which have introductory remarks on the content, and performance history of the plays, and footnotes explaining words and passages.  Paradoxically, I recommend not referring to the notes, at least not at first.  It breaks up the flow of the plays, and turns reading them into a chore, rather than a joy.  The best annotated set of plays is called The Arden Shakespeare, but there are others.

    As for that infamous canard about his works being written by some nobleman or other, it is simply another instance of thievery by the aristocracy.  It is not enough for it to steal money, land, and labor of people to sate its rapacity, but it even needs to thieve their creativity.  The answer to all the questions raised about the improbability of Shakespeare writing his works is simple.  He was a genius.

    Members of the aristocracy, most of whom being distinctly average in ability and who attain position and success because of their social status or inheritance cannot conceive of anybody creating what he did without all the educational advantages they had.  Despite numerous and repeated examples of people rising out poverty and disadvantages through hard work and brilliance to attain success and create a lasting contribution to humanity, their greed leads them to begrudge anything of value to one not of their class.  

    As for why others of equal brilliance have not appeared, the answer is also simple.  They have.  But they either were in other kinds of art, or in other fields, like science, or politics.  Other authors as brilliant have come around, but they could not hold the same position in our culture because Shakespeare already occupied it.

    • Like 3

  8. 11 hours ago, NipkowDisc said:

    and yet having fought and killed each other in a great war has brought us closer in spirit to the great Japanese people. no longer enemies but now friends and allies and comrades in arms.

    so often those we have fought later become our brothers.

    'Long as we beat 'em.

    There still is a strong strain in Japanese society which is militaristic, denying the horrors they visited on the Koreans, Chinese, and others, and honoring the war criminals we hanged.  But if individual people can be a confusing mass of contradictory elements, think what a nation of them would be.  

  9. I've talked about how I admire this movie for the themes it explores, the somber mood it creates, and the tragic ending with its joyless victory (  One thing I was oblivious to was the effect of this movie on Japanese audiences.  Needless to say, it must have been stunning, touching a very raw and unhealed nerve in the common psyche.  A large destructive force, radioactive, that lays waste to cities, destroys and maims people.  Ben Mankiewicz in his comments called the monster a metaphor for the atomic age, but I'm sure audiences saw something else in addition.  The association of the monster with the United States and it's defeat of Japan with nuclear weapons would be inescapable.  No nation enjoys the sharp sting of defeat.  It is akin to death, and desperate measures are resorted to for coping with the assault on self-worth.  The Viet Nam War is still problematic with us, and it didn't involve any devastation to our country or government.  Imagine the psychic wound the Japanese felt, a people and culture even more proud, if possible, than we are.  Perhaps there was morbid fascination with a subject matter that hewed so closely to painful matters.  But perhaps there was also a certain therapeutic effect, allowing people, if only metaphorically to achieve some sense of control over their world by defeating the monster, and doing it with a weapon of fearsome power that they willingly give up.


    • Like 4

  10. 19 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

    I recall reading somewhere that Godzilla's roar was created by stereophonic feedback. 

    Sound effects can be a funny business.  When I first saw the first STAR WARS, a sound in the movie reminded me of a sound we(as kids) would create------

    The sound of the storm troopers weapons, from an article I read, was made the same way WE created it.

    By hitting the cables used as "guy-wires" for telephone poles with a hammer!  :o


    My Mother's cousin( and of course,my cousin too) used to have a job as tutor for GI kids living on a U.S. military base near Tokyo.  When he came over here to MI for a visit, I couldn't resist----

    I mentioned that he came to visit just in time!  ;)  He asked, "In time for what?"  And I answered, "Well, I'm guessing it's nigh on time for GODZILLA season over there, eh?"  He just closed his eyes and slowly shook his lowered head back and forth.  :D 



New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:


Having problems?

Contact Us