Members

ARIES Dear Aries, you are never one to back down from any sort of confrontation. But you’re now realizing that the best course of action may be to chill out before blowing up at others. This will help you find a moment of peace and then you can more successfully express your fiery and often combustible temper. TAURUS Gossip is circulating in your peer group. Yes, they’re rumors about you. But before you go full speed ahead seeing red, take a step back and breathe. Don’t panic! Find time to think about how you want to deal with these issues. GEMINI You’re feeling a little lost these days. It’s time to ponder and reflect on the goals you once had. You may decide that you want to change the direction you’re heading in, or to slow down the amount of projects you’ve started. Spend a few moments relaxing. CANCER It’s good to take the high road sometimes. But even if you know that you’re right in a situation, it’s wise to see where others are coming from, too. In other words, be aware of your role in resolving conflicts and show some empathy. Particularly with people who are close to you. LEO You’re proud. And you are learning to control your passions. Continue to assert your feelings in matters that are important to you. However, keep in mind that the viewpoints of others may not always be diametrically opposed to your own. It’s possible to achieve greater understanding, dear Leo. VIRGO Start taking back your power and standing tall. This will allow you to feel confident and strong again. Also it’s important that you shift the focus away from others who do not appreciate you or your sentiments. Give yourself all the space you need. LIBRA Fluctuations in your daily routine may be sapping too much energy from you. This ongoing state of flux means you have been feeling as if your life is spinning out of control. It may be wise to restructure your schedule. Devise plans that are realistic. You do not have to solve every single problem or rule the world. SCORPIO Set boundaries with others. Yes, this may not be easy for everyone, especially when you have difficulty maintaining limits that you require from others. But take some time and try to be honest with what you want and need. Then, you won’t find yourself in all of these sensitive predicaments! SAGITTARIUS Life is about learning to balance the relationships in your life, especially the most intense relationships. Be careful not to give your all to a partner or demand a lot of attention. Remember that being together requires a fair amount of give and take. If you are able to find a middle ground in your relationship, it will keep you both from acting foolish. CAPRICORN Okay, you are not known to be very domestic, that’s a given. But this month, you feel inclined to begin a cooking project or a sewing project to pass the time. You may even want to do your taxes by yourself this year. These projects and activities will keep you busy and productive, even when the rest of the world is in the doldrums. AQUARIUS Dear Aquarius, life is always so full of drama. But not everything is the end of the world, is it? Why not step back and count your blessing for a change. Seek out some new hobbies and make some new friends. It certainly wouldn’t hurt. PISCES You need to start facing your fears. And come up with the answer to an important question. What do you really want? Situations might cause you to choose between your actual way of life and a more suitable way to live it. Don’t fret about the unknown. Take a chance and change your old habits.

1. Robert Aldrich: Hush...Hush Sweet Charlotte 2. William Castle: House on Haunted Hill 3. Ida Lupino: Outrage 4. Walter Hill: Southern Comfort 5. Lewis Milestone: All Quiet on the Western Front 6. Mike Nichols: Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? 7. Alexander Payne: Election 8. Vincent Sherman: All Through the Night 9. George Sidney: Kiss Me Kate 10. Don Siegel: The Beguiled Ida Lupino and Lewis Milestone were the hardest for me. If I saw this thread on a different day, I might have picked something else. I was set to pick The Drowning Pool for Walter Hill until I realized he only wrote it and didn't direct it, and this is a good reminder that I would like to see Streets of Fire. I spent a long time trying to decide if I like The Graduate, and I'm still not sure.

As I stated in my post: "They ended up not using my story, . . ." It is not word building. It is worldbuilding. If you place the story in 1880s Laramie, 1930s Chicago, or 1960s LA, the reader automatically knows what the streets and buildings look like, what people wear, and even the music coming from an open window. If you place the story on a moon of Rigel5 in the 27th Century, you have to supply those details. More importantly, you need to know a lot more about that world, and its people, than will ever be put on paper. Everything from the electrical grid to weather forecasting to where sewage treatment plants are located are going to be different from Earth's because conditions and available materials are different. Most of these elements won't become part of the story, but readers (especially sf readers) will spot inconsistencies and (greatest of all sins) contradictions. Those take a reader out of the story. They also lead to bad reviews. It is, therefore, highly important for the writer to have mapped out, at least in their mind, all the elements which come into play coincidental to the action. Example: a city in a desert where it never rains more than an inch a month isn't going to have storm drains big enough for your hero to use as an escape route. Wikipedia entry on Worldbuilding. An online community for Worldbuilding.

It's so unfortunate That Laird Cregar died at only 31 years old. He had a wonderful laugh and wicked smile that reminds me of Sydney Greenstreet's. I loved him in HEAVEN CAN WAIT, BLOOD AND SAND, I WAKE UP SCREAMING, and THIS GUN FOR HIRE.

I have the album with the booklet. Never could quite bring myself to buying the CD. I always liked "Get On The Right Thing" and "Little Lamb Dragonfly." Except for "My Love" the rest of it is pretty uninspired.

A fine collection with one or two that could have been left out. "I Don't Want To Be A Soldier" is a little too redundant for my taste. The song "Imagine" is a perfect example of lyrics shining over what is really a quite ordinary tune. The music is much more compelling on most of the others you mention. "Oh My Love" reminds me some of "Julia" in its nature more than the instrumentation. "Gimme Some Truth" along with "How Do You Sleep" share some production qualities. I agree with your thought on Nicky Hopkins playing on "Jealous Guy" and "Crippled Inside" though I don't care much for the song. His electric piano on "How Do You Sleep" adds a great undertone to it. Specter is pretty good here. I wish he would have been a little more restrained on Harrison's "All Things Must Pass."

My first thought was, she's an acquired taste, but then, has anyone ever acquired a taste for anything she has done? I have never heard of read a soul who said anything like, "What a unique talent. I always enjoy seeing what she's up to." Aside from having the business sense to buy multiple units in The Dakota, I can't think of anything she's done that is the least bit impressive. (Even as I type this I can imagine her reading it and asking, "Riiiiight ... And you are ....?")

I own the original vinyl and have a CD. It has a few good tracks but only a few.

She is not behind this documentary and did not want to be a part of it at first. If you believed your child and felt justice had not been served, why wouldnt you bring it up? What the actual truth is will never be known, but it's obvious to me, Allen used his celebrity to beat the system.

Responding to several different posts. Some of them are. Probably at least in part it's driven by what you're known for. Cruise has had a lot of success playing action stars. There surely is an upper bound however as we have seen with the extreme skepticism towards news that Harrison Ford might play Indiana Jones again. https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PlayingGertrude This would be the double standard of actresses tending to no longer get cast in lead roles once they hit 40 or so. Closely related would be the age gap in romantic pairings where actors can play romantic leads much longer than actresses can...see Jimmy Stewart being romantically paired with Jean Arthur in 1939 and then being romantically paired with half-his-age Kim Novak 20 years later after Arthur is retired from movies. https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CousinOliver The most amazing instance of this has to be none other than Leonardo Di Caprio starting out his showbiz career as the Cousin Oliver added to the final season of "Growing Pains". It helped that she grew up to be *very* good-looking. If you want to read about a more disturbing incident of aging out of "cute kid" status, go look up the actress who played Judy on "Family Matters". But don't do it on a work computer. When Tanya Roberts died there were reports that Roger Moore decided he had to retire from Bond when he found out he was older than her mom. This may not be the politically correct answer but Wonder Woman, by canon, basically has to be hot. She just has to.

I like the challenge of this thread. Some of the other simpler threads are fun but not at all challenging for people who know about movies and/or like to do the research (without complaining). It's not collegial to give someone an order like "Don't do that again." So, Magoo, please don't do that again!

I loved his puns, there were always food and restaurant related jokes on his show. I remember he once opened a cookbook and said, "I'd love to make this dish, eggs paganini." Then someone else looked at the book and said, "That's eggs, page nine." Another time, he was playing an Arab sheik called "El Morocco." Someone knocked on the door of his tent. Danny came out in his robes and said, "Who dares to come to El Morocco without a reservation?"

Switch I liked L.A Law too, it had a great cast and theme music.

THE HARDY BOYS/ NANCY DREW MYSTERIES

There are some who don't consider Woody Allen's films to be classic films because they were made after 1960. Re-reading my previous comment (which you quoted), I think what I wrote was rather sound and logical. Allen should be allowed to analyze his career. I don't think the publisher sees Ronan as being more powerful. Instead, the reluctance to publish Allen's material is political because they fear a backlash from the #MeToo crowd. If they could, they'd publish both books and make money on both of them.

I know that part of your original point was that franchises are an unimaginative way to keep the careers of actors going, but I personally am looking forward to Harrison Ford as Indy again. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull made allowances for the aging of the character and I expect a new installment will do the same. I think the fact that he is basically a tenured professor who occasionally gets drawn back into the kind of adventures which defined his youth makes the scenario all the more plausible. I was also pleased to see Carrie Fisher in the latest round of Star Wars trilogies. It made sense that in time she would have moved up to a position of power and respect in the military, so again the appropriate aging of the character was taken into consideration.

I do agree that Eddie could have done a better job emphasizing what makes it a noir film, but I think it pretty easily fits the genre once a crime is committed. Their emphasis seemed to be on explaining why the movie is so weird. I thought Jacqueline's comments about the cinematic qualities of the novel were interesting but could have been saved for after the movie. It is a good point, but some of the scenes that come to mind aren't actually in the movie. (Since I'm already comparing the book and the movie, I did like everything with Bessie better in the movie.) Overall, I think I liked it, but it would have been much better with a different lead actor. Having the author play the main character was really distracting. It seems fair that reviewers focused on that when the movie came out, especially since they saw a cut that left out a lot of important plot elements. The first scene with Bigger in it had me very skeptical about how good this movie would be. The dubbing is very noticeable, and Bigger seems like he should be his siblings' father. Bigger's youth and lack of experience is such an essential part of his character that it is bizarre to have him played by someone that is obviously too mature for the role. The story has a lot of potential, and I think there are some points that live up to it. The scenes with Bigger interacting with the police were very good. I think casting actors that were physically larger than Richard Wright helped him seem younger. Gloria Madison (Bessie) and Jean Wallace (Mary) both had very good performances. Unfortunately, it looks like this is Madison's only credit.

A rebuttal to the series: https://toisto.net/2021/02/16/allen-v-farrow-hbo-documentary-series/

Le Corbeau is very much worth seeing. Even Truffaut, who did not like Clouzot, said that this was the film that best captured the feeling of life under German occupation during WWII. The Germans let Clouzot make it because, since it's about a town torn apart by poison pen letters, they thought it made the French look bad. However, the French generally saw the analogy to life under the occupation, where people could settle old scores by anonymous letters to the German authorities. I also liked Le Corbeau better the second time I saw it. There's a remake by Preminger, set in Canada, called The Thirteenth Letter, which is also pretty good even if not so good as the original.

PEYTON PLACE (1957)

I checked out SINNER'S HOLIDAY a WARNER BROS VITAPHONE ALL-TALKING MOTION PICTURE! from 1930 on TCM ON DEMAND. [still THRILLED to PIECES that it's not OSCAR MONTH BTW...] It was worth watching for three things: 1. JAMES CAGNEY in his FILM DEBUT is SEXUAL ELECTRICITY and has, perhaps, one of his most challenging parts and scenes and he is outstanding; EVEN AT THE ONSET, IT'S CLEAR THAT IF CAGNEY IS IN THE PICTURE YOU WERE GONNA GET YER NICKEL'S WORTH!! 2. JOAN BLONDELL in an early role (maybe her first as well?)- she is a brunette but in all other respects, she is 100% the JOAN BLONDELL we all know and love- WORLD WEARY as ALL GET-OUT. JOAN BLONDELL, not here for your BS since 1930 BUT, most fascinating of all was the performance of 3. LUCILLE LAVERNE as CAGNEY'S MOTHER (and CHIEF DEFENDER)- she would later voice THE WICKED QUEEN/ THE WITCH in Disney’s SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS, and her voice in SINNER'S HOLIDAY sounds MUCH like the one she uses in character as THE WITCH. You can also see that the Disney animators clearly used some of her features for THE WITCH. she is absolutely outstanding AND THE BEST THING IN THE FILM. THIS CHICK WAS HARDCORE MOST UNFORTUNATE THOUGH, IT IS TO NOTE THAT CAGNEY and BLONDELL are NOT the FILM'S LEADS, that's two UTTER DEADBEATS played by GRANT WITHERS and some broad whose name I'm not even gonna look up SHE STUNK SO BAD. They both MURDERED every minute they were on screen and it was a DAMN SHAME that it was a 60/40 split with them stealing most of the one hour screen time from JIMMY, JOAN and LUCILLE. Still an interesting film, a little slow for a Precode, but for those who also like CARNIVAL FILMS, this one will appeal to you.

I had lots of sympathy for the protagonist, seeing the spot he was in, and how one thing led to another, even with the gruesome disposal of the body. But when he wrote that ransom note he lost that sympathy to a large degree. Good to see such a rare and interesting film on Noir Alley.

Well, I found NATIVE SON very interesting. As a movie the acting and directing was not that good, but I found the plot line very intriguing. it was also very sad. What's even sadder is that the conditions in parts of the black community today are only marginally better seventy years later. It is interesting that this film could not be made in the US in 1951. I guess one can say we've made a lot of progress in that area. However, whenever I start to think we're moving to a better place something like 1/6 happens. Like Rodney King famously said "Can't we just all get along?"

FANCY PANTS

The Magnificent Seven (1960) Silverado (1985)

Zaslow , Michael

Our ninth villain is LAIRD CREGAR He was the devil incarnate (literally) in HEAVEN CAN WAIT (1943). He was a Jack-the-Ripper type renting a room from Merle Oberon's family in THE LODGER (1944). And he was obsessed with pretty Linda Darnell in HANGOVER SQUARE (1945). Yes, no matter how you slice it, he was one dangerous man!

which movie is better? The Out-of-Towners or The Prisoner of Second Avenue. both are good but I think out-of-towners has the edge.

Native Son was kind of a mixed bag. It went a bit downhill after the first murder and became more of a standard crime flick, though the criminal being black made it a bit more interesting. Yeah, I doubt any American film made at the same time would have shown so clearly the discrimination and oppression of black people as Native Son did. On the mistakes criminals make side, I would have just left Jean Wallace in her bed and let people assume she was drunk and died from something related to that. Keep it simple is sometimes the best way to go. I read Native Son a long time ago and just remember the general plot, but I'm guessing that the book is more complex than the movie. One last lesson--if you see some young, affluent Marxists coming toward you, run like hell or you might be in a world of pain.

Tenspeed and Brown Shoe Ben Vereen's character is nicknamed Tenspeed.

Also was in The Conversation...

I'm a badass Aries.

Christopher Guest Next: Wuthering Heights (1939) Spellbound (1945) The Bad and the Beautiful (1952) North by Northwest (1959) The Parent Trap (1961)

From 1945 forward, Paramount boss Buddy DeSylva only put Betty in lead roles. She was his discovery and if you look back at some of her films prior to '45, you can see how she would be given the role with the most screen time, even she wasn't technically the lead...such as STAR SPANGLED RHYTHM (1942) which is supposed to be an all-star revue. Or else they beefed up her scenes as a supporting character in a way that she could make a lasting impression and steal the picture like we see in AND THE ANGELS SING...where she is billed under Dorothy Lamour but pretty much outshines Lamour. She already had a huge fan base on radio. It makes sense that they would start pushing her more into the spotlight, developing vehicles specifically for her talents. Unlike Lamour (who had Bob Hope & Bing Crosby) or other Paramount star actresses like Veronica Lake (who had Alan Ladd) or Madeleine Carroll (who had Fred MacMurray), Betty Hutton did not have a persona that fit with a regular leading man. The closest she came to this was with Eddie Bracken. But even then she would be overpowering Bracken in their scenes together to where it ultimately became a Betty Hutton picture featuring Eddie Bracken, as we see in THE MIRACLE OF MORGAN'S CREEK (1944). She had her first lead in 1943, opposite Bob Hope in LET'S FACE IT, an adaptation of a Broadway farce. Seven years later the studio intended to reunite her with Hope in FANCY PANTS (1950) but I don't think Hope wanted to work with her again, because her clout on the Paramount lot was probably equal to his by that point. She would certainly not have gone along with it being a Bob Hope picture. And Hope would not have gone along with it being a Betty Hutton picture. So Betty did LET'S DANCE with Fred Astaire instead, and Lucille Ball stepped in to do FANCY PANTS.

Michael Tucker Next: The Irish in Us (1935) Stage Struck (1936) Four Daughters (1938) All Through the Night (1942) The Last Hurrah (1956)

Actually, he did age out of the role.

XENA WARRIOR PRINCESS

Robby Benson Once saw him a stage production of KING OF HEARTS at the Westport Playhouse. Entertaining. Very nasal singing voice, however. Next up. Since I just watched DINER (1982) LETS GO WITH; DINER (1982) THE EYES OF LAURA MARS (1978) NETWORK (1976) TIN MEN (1987) FOR LOVE OR MONEY (1993)

I'm not saying that Allen should not be allowed to publish his book. I quoted you because you theorized that Allen's book would be a bestseller, which is not possible. Your perspective is one way of looking at things. Since this isn't a forum about publishing nonfiction books, that side of it hasn't really been considered here. It could be that they feared backlash from publishing Allen's book, but it could also be an entirely monetary decision. They already had a relationship with an author with a steady output who recently released one of their biggest hits. Woody's book doesn't make that much of a difference in their bottom line, so why not ditch him for the guy that is making them more money and has more potential to release another book in the future. In 2019, one of the two of the publisher's nonfiction books that outsold Ronan was Donald Trump Jr.'s Triggered: How the Left Thrives on Hate and Wants to Silence Us. It was published by Center Street, which is an imprint that focuses on politically conservative books. In addition to Donald Trump Jr's book, they've also published books by Newt Gingrich and various employees of Fox News.

THE BUGLE SOUNDS

THE STRANGE MR GREGORY

And one can not make reference to One Million B.C. (1940) without acknowledging its remake, One Million Years B.C. (1966). And why must the remake be acknowledged? Two words: Raquel Welch.

NO WAY TO TREAT A LADY (1968)

Naomi Next: Hackett, Ebsen and Holly

Love the comments so far. It occurs to me as I read these comments that successful child stars like Mickey Rooney and Elizabeth Taylor often "aged out" of roles as they grew older. But they managed to keep reinventing themselves, playing other more suitable roles as the decades went on. Another thing that occurs to me, related to Kid Chaplin's comment above, is that The Rifleman might have gone off the air, but other shows stayed on the air by adding in new smaller children. For instance, there's a season of The Adventures of Ozzie & Harriet where the Nelson brothers are now in college and finding wives, where Ozzie starts mentoring cute little kids in the neighborhood. One of them is played by Barry Livingston before he was cast on My Three Sons. So they were able to still do some of the same types of stories for Oz they had done when his sons were younger by having him now interact with new younger children in guest roles or recurring roles. In the case of TV's Family Ties sitcom in the 80s, Tina Yothers became too old to play the sassy kid sister, so they aged the baby that Steven & Elyse had, by casting him with young Brian Bonsall who in the last two seasons was now the wisecracking kid brother. Needless to say Tina Yothers' screen time decreased drastically. But they were still able to keep the formula intact, which was Alex the older brother (Michael J. Fox) taking the younger sibling under his wing. As we see with the Nelsons' sitcom and Family Ties the producers and writers were able to keep those shows on the air, even though some of the performers had basically aged out of their earlier roles.

Or building on established premises. Soap opera writers had to do that day to day, just keep stringing a story out until finally somebody just had to die. But building on prior plot lines is a great way to develop characters and advance stories, especially noticeable in the shows I mentioned.

So you're saying the father was one of the servants.

///