Bogie56

HITS & MISSES: Yesterday, Today & Tomorrow on TCM

8,837 posts in this topic

10 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

Someone in another thread (again I can't recall which) used the term "universally-acknowledged classics" or something similar a week or two ago. It led me to wonder if there really is such a thing. Is there a movie that everyone around here would agree was good? Before the internet I would have named several, based on my own opinion, that of those in my immediate circle (friends & family), and what I have read in film books. But now...I can't think of any movie that I haven't read someone voicing dislike for.

Such is the World Wide Net. Everyone is a movie critic nowadays. We have privy to more opinions that we ever thought we might want.

"Anyone with a cellphone today is paparazzi; anyone with a Twitter account is a reporter; anyone with YouTube access is a filmmaker. When everyone is a paparazzi, reporter and filmmaker, everyone else is a public figure." –Thomas Friedman (June 23, 2012)

And anyone with an opinion is a critic. And there lots and lots of them.

////

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, laffite said:

"Anyone with a cellphone today is paparazzi; anyone with a Twitter account is a reporter; anyone with YouTube access is a filmmaker. When everyone is a paparazzi, reporter and filmmaker, everyone else is a public figure." –Thomas Friedman (June 23, 2012)

All of Thomas Friedman's taxi drivers are esteemed political pundits.  Also, this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"-didn;t care for "...December' (WAY too sappy)

but recording top 2

& "Buck..." is pretty good too"

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yikes.......

are they ACTUALLY re-airing "Warm December" as an ESSENTIAL??  :rolleyes:

giphy.gif

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

I'm a big fan of Dr. Strangelove but my wife isn't.   She views the film as too campy and a lot of the humor goes over her head.    She has this view towards most of Peter Sellers work.      I.e. her reaction is often 'are you kidding me' and I have to say 'yes,,  that is their intent!'.

 

Yeah, I really(and for a long time) like "Dr. Strangelove", and too, my wife hated it.  But it seems it was that she never cottoned to PETER SELLERS.  So it was more him being in it than probably the movie.

Sepiatone

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, laffite said:

Such is the World Wide Net. Everyone is a movie critic nowadays. We have privy to more opinions that we ever thought we might want.

"Anyone with a cellphone today is paparazzi; anyone with a Twitter account is a reporter; anyone with YouTube access is a filmmaker. When everyone is a paparazzi, reporter and filmmaker, everyone else is a public figure." –Thomas Friedman (June 23, 2012)

And anyone with an opinion is a critic. And there lots and lots of them.

////

 

And too, a lot of obscure, unaccomplished people with Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram accounts and YouTube access get tagged as "stars".   Check this out(and for just one name) and see how many are either YouTube or TIK TOK "stars".

https://www.famousbirthdays.com/names/kyle.html

I always thought "stars" were so due to their exceptional ability or immense popularity in some endeavor that requires some higher level of talent or ability.  I don't see how crushing your nuts or some other stupid activity you post as a YouTube clip fits that criteria. 

Sepiatone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Sepiatone said:

Yeah, I really(and for a long time) like "Dr. Strangelove", and too, my wife hated it.  But it seems it was that she never cottoned to PETER SELLERS.  So it was more him being in it than probably the movie.

Sepiatone

i think a lot of men recognize themselves, their fathers/uncles/brothers, and various schoolmates and coaches in GEORGE C. SCOTT's character.

even i have to laugh at the whole "like roastin' chickens in a barnyard" thing.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, laffite said:

"Up to "Strangelove" ?  But not including? I tremble to think someone might reveal that he/she doesn't like that one. If so, then still another of the naturals shocks that flesh is heir to. Thanks, Will.

 

Actually, I do like Dr. Strangelove. Perhaps I should have worded my statement that I like Kubrick films up to and including Dr. Strangelove. But, to be honest, of that of the six films he made after Strangelove I've only seen three of them (2001, Clockwork Orange and The Shining).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

i think a lot of men recognize themselves, their fathers/uncles/brothers, and various schoolmates and coaches in GEORGE C. SCOTT's character.

even i have to laugh at the whole "like roastin' chickens in a barnyard" thing.

Yes, and which is bad enough, but you REALLY have to begin worrying when one begins to recognize themselves, their fathers/uncles/brothers/various schoolmates and coaches in STERLING HAYDEN's character!

(...and that's when a preemptive phone call to a local mental health facility/law enforcement agency/Homeland Security office might be best advised)

;)

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sepiatone said:

I always thought "stars" were so due to their exceptional ability or immense popularity ...

Immense popularity; yes ... exceptional ability: not necessarily. IMO.

In the spirit of the Friedman quote who says that everyone can be a public figure, so do we thus have these self-styled, self-promoted, would-be "celebrities."  This may not fit the criteria as you say, and it doesn't in the larger sense; but peculiar to the youtube culture anyway some of these "stars" have gotten enough hits to "distinguish" themselves. They may be represent nothing special for a lot of people but they have, at least in their own eyes, transcended the fifteen-minutes-of-fame category.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TODAY SEEMS TO BE A MUMMY/ANCIENT EGYPT DAY-

THIS LOOKS TERRIBLE:

9:30 AM
B/W - 68 m
Mummy's Boys (1936)

Synopsis: Two ditch-digging fools sign on to help excavate a cursed Egyptian tomb.
DirFred Guiol CastBert Wheeler , Robert Woolsey , Barbara Pepper .

 
ALSO, LAND OF THE PHAROAHS, which- I dunno- isn't that bad some time ca. 11:00 am and THE 1959 HAMMER VERSION OF THE MUMMY, which I like quite a bit on at 6 pm.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mummy's Boys is really meh and the racist scenes do not age well. My favorite Wheeler and Woolsey film is Girl Crazy.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tonight! Two visionary masterpieces from Japan:

BELLADONNA OF SADNESS (1973) at 2:00 am east / 11:00 pm west

followed by HAUSU (1977) at 3:30 am

:)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, mr6666 said:

Tonight! Two visionary masterpieces from Japan:

BELLADONNA OF SADNESS (1973) at 2:00 am east / 11:00 pm west

followed by HAUSU (1977) at 3:30 am

:)

HAUSA!!!

giphy.gif

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LawrenceA said:

HAUSA!!!

giphy.gif

That gif is amazing. I'm trying to figure out in what context I can text this to my husband as part of a conversation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mr6666 said:

Tonight! Two visionary masterpieces from Japan:

BELLADONNA OF SADNESS (1973) at 2:00 am east / 11:00 pm west

followed by HAUSU (1977) at 3:30 am

:)

Belladonna is one of my favorite anime films. I love the violent, erotic imagery.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On September 25, 2019 at 2:24 PM, LornaHansonForbes said:

it has something to do with Russian Naming Culture- I forget the specifics, but some(?) Russians make male first names a variation on the father's family names, and some last names translate to "son of" ie "DAVIDOVITCH = SON OF DAVID".) HUMBERt HUMBERT is a play on that sort of confusing nomenclature, which would appeal to a cryptic and slightly ludicrous writer like NABOKOV (i mean that as a compliment).

LOLITA is to NABOKOV'S full body of work as HAMLET is to SHAKESPEARE'S- It's the one they FORCE YOU TO READ in college, but to be honest, "meh."

NABOKOV is a bit like another writer I admire greatly, CHARLES DICKENS in that both are A+ writers and B+ storytellers- sometimes the tale they are telling is no great shakes, but oh, HOW THEY TELL IT!

of his non-LOLITA books- I would recommend PNIN- which is an English Language novel of his about a Russian expat college professor and is very charming and personal and funny or THE DEFENSE (aka THE LUZHIN (sp?) DEFENSE), which is about a RUSSIAN CHESS PRODIGY who unspools as an adult and starts seeing the world as a giant chess game and only moves accordingly- ie diagonally when it's time to "be the bishop" or two steps forward and to the side when it's time to "move the Knight." it's pretty funny, especially if you like Chess

LOLITA is- in all honesty- not a book about an affair between a middle aged man and a too young girl- i mean, that happens in it, but it is NOT what the book is about. It is about a writer (Nabokov) creating a narrator of a story (Humbert) that takes over the story, MURDERS THE WRITER, and tries to get away with it.

You may wish to try my second favourite Nabakov, PALE FIRE.  The wikipedia synopsis does it much better justice than I ever could but I will add that I found the book very very funny.  Just the idea that someone has the conceit to annotate another person's poem withe the view that it is all about his own life (which is pretty bizarre) is pretty funny.

I'm sure the significance of Humbert Humbert's name is mentioned in the annotated Lolita which I have in storage somewhere.  That is well worth a read too.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On September 23, 2019 at 12:09 AM, speedracer5 said:

Lol. Maybe I'll have to brew up a lot of coffee to get through it. Barry Lyndon is also insanely long. I'll probably have to watch it in chunks. 

While it can be said of almost any film, Barry Lyndon really does benefit enormously from seeing it on the big screen.  It added one full star in my diary each time I did so.  And Lyndon takes the approach that its story is being drawn out of period paintings which in its case is John Alcott's cinematography.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tuesday, October 1

MV5BYzdiNjMyOTUtYWM1OS00MWUwLWIxNjQtMzFj

9:45 p.m.  The Lady Eve (1941).  I saw this again recently at London’s NFT theatre and was not disappointed.   Fonda has never been funnier.  Stanwyck hardly better and Charles Coburn is fantastic.

 
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Bogie56 said:

You may wish to try my second favourite Nabakov, PALE FIRE.  The wikipedia synopsis does it much better justice than I ever could but I will add that I found the book very very funny.  Just the idea that someone has the conceit to annotate another person's poem withe the view that it is all about his own life (which is pretty bizarre) is pretty funny.

 

I MOST DEFINITELY WILL!!!!

Heretofore I thought PALE FIRE was strictly a long-form poem a la TENNYSON, I can totally see VLADIMIR doing something like this- honestly, NABOKOV is much funnier than people give him credit for.

i think PALE FIRE is included in my EVERYMAN'S EDITION of LOLITA and PNIN, so I will crack it open sometime soon.

ps- what is your first favorite NABOKOV?

PSS- I also tried reading THE GIFT, but the edition I had was printed in the eentiest teentiest sized print I have ever seen, seriously- i think it was printed by Elves in a tree- and trying to read it left me looking like MARTY FELDMAN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

I MOST DEFINITELY WILL!!!!

Heretofore I thought PALE FIRE was strictly a long-form poem a la TENNYSON, I can totally see VLADIMIR doing something like this- honestly, NABOKOV is much funnier than people give him credit for.

i think PALE FIRE is included in my EVERYMAN'S EDITION of LOLITA and PNIN, so I will crack it open sometime soon.

ps- what is your first favorite NABOKOV?

PSS- I also tried reading THE GIFT, but the edition I had was printed in the eentiest teentiest sized print I have ever seen, seriously- i think it was printed by Elves in a tree- and trying to read it left me looking like MARTY FELDMAN.

Lolita is still my favourite but Pale Fire is a close second.  It's much funnier for starters.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Bogie56 said:

Tuesday, October 1

MV5BYzdiNjMyOTUtYWM1OS00MWUwLWIxNjQtMzFj

9:45 p.m.  The Lady Eve (1941).  I saw this again recently at London’s NFT theatre and was not disappointed.   Fonda has never been funnier.  Stanwyck hardly better and Charles Coburn is fantastic.

 

Bogie,

glad to see ya Back   :)

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Bogie56 said:

Tuesday, October 1

MV5BYzdiNjMyOTUtYWM1OS00MWUwLWIxNjQtMzFj

9:45 p.m.  The Lady Eve (1941).  I saw this again recently at London’s NFT theatre and was not disappointed.   Fonda has never been funnier.  Stanwyck hardly better and Charles Coburn is fantastic.

 

It's a night of EVES. 3 Faces of EVE starts out the night at  8pm!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

I MOST DEFINITELY WILL!!!!

Heretofore I thought PALE FIRE was strictly a long-form poem a la TENNYSON, I can totally see VLADIMIR doing something like this- honestly, NABOKOV is much funnier than people give him credit for.

i think PALE FIRE is included in my EVERYMAN'S EDITION of LOLITA and PNIN, so I will crack it open sometime soon.

ps- what is your first favorite NABOKOV?

PSS- I also tried reading THE GIFT, but the edition I had was printed in the eentiest teentiest sized print I have ever seen, seriously- i think it was printed by Elves in a tree- and trying to read it left me looking like MARTY FELDMAN.

I also love The Defense, which is not funny. Pale Fire is a poem with footnotes--but the footnotes are, in effect, a novel, as the critic reads all of his personal concerns into the poem. Though some of Nabokov's novels stick in the memory more than others, most of them are well worth reading.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wednesday, October 2

MV5BNGQxZWI1ODUtNGNjYS00MTRhLWJhYzctNDE2

6:30 p.m.  One Way Passage (1932)  With William Powell and Kay Francis.

 
  • Like 1

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

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us