Sign in to follow this  
Jayo

"Moguls and Movie Stars"

312 posts in this topic

Just want to say that I am really enjoying the Wednesday Night Discussions that appear after the showing of each new episode. Last night's conversation was especially interesting when Robert Osborne pointedly asked why certain stars were missing from the series - in particular, Laurel And Hardy.

 

The series writer Jon Wilkman said that many very important persons had to be left out in an effort to focus on persons who were the most instrumental or demonstrative of the series theses about the evolution of Hollywood. But that it in no way should be interpreted as diminishing the importance of those not featured in the history of Hollywood. At which point, Cari Beachaump adds "TCM could do an another Seven Hour series just about the people NOT in the Original Production." Every one laughed and nodded their heads in agreement.

 

Cari Beachaump was particularly witty last night about the racy materials in some films of the 20s referencing a film called *Back Pay* and what I assume was the tag line for the film. Something about "The wages of sin being the back pay owed to thousands of women" which had the gathered group in roaring. Ms. Beachaump has become one of my favorite historians.

 

I don't know if there are unedited versions of these "post-presentation" conversations but I would love to hear them in their entireity. Maybe they can be incorporated into the DVDs or uploaded to the website.

 

Kyle In Hollywood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Stan & Ollie are not even mentioned when they get into the sound era, which they have not yet reached? The only comedy teams of the '30s bigger than Laurel and Hardy are arguably the Marx Brothers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*I don't know if there are unedited versions of these "post-presentation" conversations but I would love to hear them in their entireity. Maybe they can be incorporated into the DVDs or uploaded to the website.*

 

Chief,

 

That's a great idea. I watch the series on Monday night (and have it set for Tivoing that night as well) and I tend to forget to watch the Wednesday evening encore presentation with the after chat. I watched the first one but have missed the last two and am now kicking myself for being so forgetful.

 

I'll change my Tivo next week to record the Wednesday night episodes but having them uploaded to the Media Room would be great.

 

Cari B. is also great in person. She was one of the hosts at the TCM Film Festival and she introduced *Sunset Blvd* and did the Q&A with Nancy Olson and she also did a very funny intro for the second screening of *Sunnyside Up*.

 

I'd like to see more of her on TCM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*"So Stan & Ollie are not even mentioned when they get into the sound era, which they have not yet reached? The only comedy teams of the '30s bigger than Laurel and Hardy are arguably the Marx Brothers."* - finance

 

They may be mentioned but it sounds as if they won't featured. While they are very important to the rise of Hal Roach's mogul-dom, my interpretation is that they were "passed over" to include Lloyd, Keaton and Chaplin as silent era performers who succeeded, struggled or failed with the transistion to sound films.

 

And "The Marx Brothers" will be the figures who represent the rise of comedians who emerge with the comedic opportunities that come with the introduction of dialogue in the sound era.

 

Kyle In Hollywood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> While TCM is airing Chaplin's THE KID this evening, as usual it will be the caustically reedited 1972 version. Not the original cut of the movie. The film is much stronger in it's entirety. If only the rather dense Chaplin Heir's understood this. They do Chaplin a disservice by not letting the complete works be scene.

 

Wouldn't that be Chaplin's fault? Or did he not have control over the reediting of *The Kid* the way he did with *The Gold Rush* 30 years earlier?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fedya,

 

Those re-edits where made at a different time, and for a different medium. And with reasoning that no longer applies. Long before we had Blu-Ray's, DVD's, Director's cut editions, and even VHS or laser-disc. To recognize them as being the definitive versions now and suppress the true films the way Charlie made them is nothing short of ridiculous.

 

I mean look around, collectors desire the most complete versions of every film now. That is why they have releases like the Ultimate NOSFERATU, or the complete METROPOLIS etc. So the Chaplin Heir's have to recognize that they are being backward in their approach. Instead of giving us more such as with the Lloyd DVD's for example, they are giving us less. They are out of touch with their audience and what that audience really wants to see from them.

 

The sad thing is David Shepard restored all the Chaplin features, as well he First National shorts with the exception of THE GOLD RUSH to full-length. But those DVD's once offered by Image are long out of print and Criterion will be the second series of DVD's after the Warner's deal featuring only the re-edited versions of these films.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based upon what I've seen so far, as a Carole Lombard fan, I have this horrid feeling she will be ignored in chapter 4, and that screwball comedy will solely be illustrated by Katharine Hepburn and Cary Grant in "Bringing Up Baby."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think the question isn't whether the materials to show the full version are out there; it's who owns the rights to broadcast them. Who authorized the 1970s edit? It's my impression that, since Chaplin went to United Artists, he would still have owned the rights to the movies he produces. That was, after all, the reason for founding UA, wasn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanted to talk a little about *The Kid* and wasn't sure which thread to post it on (didn't want to start a new thread just about that one film.) This looks like a good thread to comment about this film -they wouldn't have shown it last night if it hadn't been for "Moguls and Movie Stars".

 

I like Charlie Chaplin, but *The Kid* is one of his films I'd never seen before last night. What a sweet and charming little movie it is.. Chaplin is one of a very few directors -in silents or talkies -who can somehow get away with this kind of pathos and sentiment without it sliding into bathos and maudlin overkill. I don't know how he does it -maybe it's how he mixes in the comedy so deftly. I loved this funny little silent movie; it actually made me laugh out loud. After nearly a century, Chaplin's antics are still funny. I'ts partly his facial expressions, he can be so fastidious, almost dainty, even though his character is "just a tramp". He's like this in all his silent films, shabby but elegant. There are many scenes in *The Kid* that are similtaneously sweet and funny; one that comes to mind is the breakfast scene, in which the little boy has just made a stack of pancakes (a five-year old cook ! ) and they settle down to eat them. Charlie notices that he has one more pancake than the kid has, and he solemnly divides the extra pancake in half for them to share.

 

Chaplin is also very funny when he's flirting. There's a scene where he starts to flirt with the woman whose window he's fixing. The physical humour involved in this bit, the goofy smirk Charlie assumes, the sly quickness with which he scrambles away when the husband appears, all contribute to the lovely goofy physical comedy which makes me laugh out loud, decades after *The Kid* was made.

 

*I was unaware that this was not the original version -I'd love to see that, too.*

 

Edited by: misswonderly on Nov 18, 2010 2:55 PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also saw *The Kid* for the first time last night and I thought it was wonderful. Now I can't decide between *The Kid* and *Modern Times* as my favorite Chaplin I have seen (and I admit I still have a lot I need to see).

 

I also loved Keaton's *Steamboat Bill Jr*. (it was also my first time seeing this film).

 

I know a lot of people have preference between Keaton and Chaplin but I honestly can't decide between them. I recorded *Safety Last* which will be my first Lloyd Film so I will see if there will be a 3 way tie or not. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL in all seriousness I expect It Happened One Night being used to highlight screwball comedies since that is playing on TCM after Moguls Wed night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am so glad that people were able to watch these Chaplin and Keaton movies last night for the first time! That rocks! I am a big fan of both filmmakers, which doesn't always happen. :)

 

My daughter has seen *Modern Times* and *The Immigrant*, *The Rink* and *City Lights* before. *Modern Times* is her favorite. She watched part of *The Kid* once before as well but was too young for it, I think. She also watched parts of Steamboat Bill Jr at an earlier time and liked it.

 

But last night, as a budding Chaplin officianado, she was jumping up and down, laughing at JACKIE COOGAN.... She kept saying, "He's just like a little Charlie...it's so funny, mom, that's just what Charlie would do!" as Jackie was winding up, breaking the windows and getting caught by the policeman. This to me was the strength of the movie - Chaplin was able to translate his actions on the small side to Jackie, so there is no doubt that he IS the kid's father, whether or not he was the birth father.

 

Usually, I am so overcome with emotion that I don't notice the humor within the pathos, but I noticed that the saddest parts were never SO sad that a little humor could not be injected. Alice stood transfixed in front of the TV, as little Jackie was taken away. I think she even let out an "Awwww no!" at one point. When Chaplin stared at the truck driver and ran after him, and the truck driver stopped and looked back, she let out a guffaw. Every time Charlie gave his little shuffle to show the driver he was coming after him, she laughed. HARD. It was the biggest laugh of the movie.

 

I of course was in tears, as always.

 

P.S. I LOVE the shot of Chaplin running up over the tops of the tenements and you see the truck coming into view, he has actually beaten it by cutting across the roofs - it's a masterful shot that always takes my breath away.....

 

I too would like to see the original - I am almost sure I have seen it before and it is much more moving, if you can believe it. However, I am just happy that the movie was on TV, no matter which version, for people to discover again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one reason *The Kid* is as good as it is is because of Jackie Coogan. For such a young actor, he sure does pack an emotional wallop in his scenes with Chaplin.

 

If Coogan hadn't been as good as he is in this film, the film could have quickly spun into bathos and parody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*"...I expect "It Happened One Night" being used to highlight screwball comedies since that is playing on TCM after Moguls Wed night."* - kinokima

 

While that aspect may be mentioned, I believe *It Happened One Night* is actually a film selected to illustrate the elevation of Columbia Pictures from Poverty Row studio to a competitor with the other majors like Paramount, MGM and WB - primarily because of the works of Frank Capra.

 

Kyle In Hollywood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeffrey,

 

If you are going to repost what Chris writes on Nitrateville, I do hope that you asked if it was okay to repost his words, in their entirety here.

 

If Chris has no problem, that's fine. But it should be up to him to decide where his words are reposted and he should know that you did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lynn,

 

I'm not trying to be disrespectful. I could have just posted the link again, but that would mean going through the whole thread in order to find his comments. Allot of people probably wouldn't do this. That is why I posted just his portion here. There are at least a couple others I would like to quote as well. I haven't done so. Anyway, why should he mind? I don't know if Chris is even registered here or not? I just wanted other people's take on his comments.I'm sure that he's interested in them too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeffrey,

 

Netquette asks that you get permission to repost what someone has written on another site. The exception to the rule is often bloggers and web journalists (though a link to the original article should be included).

 

Chris wrote his post to the community of Nitrateville where he is a member. As far as I know, he's not a member here. He wrote his piece in response to what others had written at Nitrateville, not here. He deserves to know that you have reposted his original post here. He may not have a problem with you doing that. But, he may.

 

Either way, he deserves to know that you have posted his comments here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Besides, IT HAPPENED ONE NIGHT could be described as screwball--light. A film of around the same time that was more typically screwball was TWENTIETH CENTURY.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=finance wrote:}{quote}

> Besides, IT HAPPENED ONE NIGHT could be described as screwball--light. A film of around the same time that was more typically screwball was TWENTIETH CENTURY.

 

 

Be that as it may It Happened One Night is pretty much always referred to as the first Screwball Comedy. It came out some months before Twentieth Century.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*"I don't remember seeing any of the discussions - I'll have to check my recordings, they sound great!"* - JackFavell

 

*"I watched the first one but have missed the last two and am now kicking myself for being so forgetful."* - lzcutter

 

Stop kicking yourself lzcutter and JackFavell can put the search on hold. The discussions have been online all along.

TCM _has_ uploaded them to the Moguls website.

http://www.tcm.com/moguls/

 

Just select the episode and then choose "Video". One can see the promo for that week's episode and the "Round-Up" discussion shown after the Wednesday presentation.

 

And while you're there, take the Trivia Quiz about the episode to see how much you learned that week.

 

Kyle In Hollywood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*"Besides, IT HAPPENED ONE NIGHT could be described as screwball--light. A film of around the same time that was more typically screwball was TWENTIETH CENTURY."* - finance

 

I agree with that assessment. *Twentieth Century* is much more illustrative of the "screwball" genre. I always think of *It Happened One Night* more as a romantic comedy. But they are both virtually perfect films.

 

I'm not expecting the series to focus on certain genres that have become part of the classic film canon - unless they are integral to the story of a specific studio,, like WB and gangster films. A detailed examination of "screwball comedy" or the evolution of westerns really is outside the boundaries set by the documentary. But I hope the series does go further into detailing the "styles" that have become associated with the major studios. It was hinted at in the synopsis for Episode Three but I really don't remember it being present in the commentary.

 

Kyle In Hollywood

 

Edited by: hlywdkjk on Nov 19, 2010 7:28 AM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us