I've been wanting Robert Montgomery to be SOTM again. Maybe in December when TCM usually picks a SOTM for whom they have a large library of films on hand, like they did with William Powell last December and Mickey Rooney the year before that.

I don't think Robert Montgomery has ever had a SUTS day, and he was SOTM only once... January 2006 I believe???

I have a very rare Kay Francis picture called THE MAN WHO LOST HIMSELF, co-starring Brian Aherne and made at Universal in 1941. Francis did a couple of others at Big U in 40-41: WHEN THE DALTONS RODE and IT'S A DATE (now owned by MGM).

LOL. Here we go again.......

i see that MS. Garbo has only been on SUTS only 2 times, it seems to me that she deserves more time than this - if only to look at her face!

I couldn't agree more, hlywdkjk.

Your other observation about those who won't pass up any chance to say something snide is incisive. Why certain types can always be counted upon to ratchet up the negativity to beyond what anyone else intends is their own dark little secret. Perhaps it's living under bridges that makes them like that.

darkblue -

For What It's Worth...

Dominick's thread was at the top of the front page at the time of the creation of the thread from TopBilled. In fact, it was in that thread that 'calvinnme' posted that he would be returning "later" to offer up his monthly aggregation of titles. Shortly after that post from 'calvinnme', the new thread from TopBilled appeared.

As far as I am concerned, because of all the time and effort that 'calvinnme' puts in to amassing all the titles for an upcoming month - and which he has been doing for many months - he has every right to create a new thread for his work. I am sure it makes it easier for him to update as he does every few hours/days.

"I myself had no notion about the matter until I read the allusion to how 'they act like this because they're anonymous and it's sad' which prompted me to go looking for whatever nastiness must have provoked such a sharply critical observation." - darkblue

They never let an opportunity to be snide go to waste. I swear they believe it is their mission here to do so. What is most funny to me - because I am often the subject (poorly veiled) of such "withering criticism" - is the fact that I am probaly the least "anonymous" member here. The truly "anonymous" ones are those that can't behave like adults and are operating under their second, third, or fourteenth membership ID.

Kyle In Hollywood

I just want to add a few things to the discussion, if I may:

First, I did not remember seeing Dominick's thread. I think his may not have lasted, because it was more speculation instead of actual information about the SUTS offerings (it was too early at that time).

Next, when I started my thread, it was very carefully not labeled 'August Schedule.' I had no intention of duplicating calvin's day-by-day list of titles that he usually posts.

My goal was simply to create a thread about the 'lineup.' Who were the 31 honorees and were there any major surprises. I still plan on posting short bios of the stars each day in August on that thread. So I will not be focusing on the films but rather on the legacy of each performer and why their work is worth celebrating x-number of years later.

Finally, what would happen if someone locked up the rights to future threads. What if Dominick or myself or calvin or anyone started creating threads now for 2013 SUTS and 2014 SUTS...? I think a thread stays active for up to a year. So every few months, a general blurb could be added to keep the thread active until that year's SUTS came to pass.

Do you see how ridiculous it gets? LOL Obviously, there are going to be duplicate threads from time to time, but we should also try not to look at this like registering internet domains, where nobody else can own a similar thread. However, when someone does have a strong thread going and there is plenty of activity on it, then there is really no need to go out and make another thread about the exact same thing.

Perhaps the SUTS topic (which has been discussed in several threads going back years) felt a little different than Calvinnme's traditional monthly advisers. They just happen to share the month in question this time.

He could have put it into the smaller thread that had already been started, and probably should have, but at least he made a post there acknowledging the possible duplication and advising that he was doing so. Again, I think his monthly tradition had some influence on that decision.

But I'm not trying to convince you that you needn't take umbrage at duplicated threads - even in this case. You have a right to your complaint, same as anyone.

I myself had no notion about the matter until I read the allusion to how 'they act like this because they're anonymous and it's sad' which prompted me to go looking for whatever nastiness must have provoked such a sharply critical observation. So I went looking and lzcutter helped me to where I could aquaint myself with the back story. Turns out it wasn't much worth the read, but curiosity killed the cat in this case - I just felt compelled to know what had been said.

It was eminently droppable many posts ago.