Tikisoo

OK....so now we know anything started by MultiEye contains only posts by MultiEye and those posts are only photos. Zero discussion. Zero input. Too bad, a discussion about Paulette Goddard may have been entertaining & enlightening.

ValentineX said: DEATH TO SMOOCHY Funny story about that film: I was dating a guy who was in the Hollywood North film industry. He said I needed to come up and watch the making of a film in the works- a musical with Robin Williams. Jaded as I was at the time, I never came up to see it being made. (nor CHICAGO, which he also said I would enjoy) Later he said the entire industry was laughing at how utterly horrible this film ended up becoming. He would not let me see any rough cut videos. Later, even Jon Stewart made fun of his appearance in the "worst movie ever made". Several years later, I see DEATH TO SMOOCHY in a cheapie bin, so I bought it on a whim. I loved it! I thought no one really understood it was really a black comedy. I've watched it several times since, even MrTiki and the Kid loved it. It's supposed to be kind of goofy story wise. The acting is superb-love Kathleen Keener especially but all supporting actors are well known Canadian pros. My only beef is the language. But I love that it's the story of a goodie two shoes politically correct guy that succeeds in a corrupt world. The scene where he gets his new Smoochy suit playing to a Yma Sumac song and putting black organic ketchup on his Nathan's Hot Dog are priceless.

I'd much rather attend CINECON than TCM's "classic film festival". Heck, CINECON even includes "celebrity guests" for people more interested in stars than actually seeing rare films.

Hey, at least you get TCM... I don't even have cable TV. If I see something listed on TCM that everyone is talking about, I just borrow it from the library. I'm sure STAGECOACH is available. Now, if I were paying for speshel TV and not getting it, it would be worth reconsidering. "Congratulations Canada on adapting the 24 clock!" (Rick Mercer-"Talking To Americans")

Wow-lots of love for the Spiñal Tap. The designer who created the Stonehenge was Angelica Huston in a cameo role. Nigel Tufnel presented her with his drawing on the napkin ("eff the napkin!") with the 18" dimension instead of 18'. There is a short in existence about Tony Pushetta, the limo driver played by Bruno Kirby I've been trying to get my hands on forever. The outtake of Tap getting him high backstage is a riot, he ends up singing "My Way" in his undies. Glad they kept it out of the finished film, though. Also, love the lip sore both Nigel & David St Hubbins sport in various takes. It's almost funnier they dropped the scene that explains it. It's a movie I can watch over & over and always find new jokes/puns missed before. It took over 10 viewings to realize the "I Love Lucy" for "Isle of Lucy" gag. (Isle of Wight was a popular rock spot in UK) Extremely clever writing on all fronts. That said, I have shown it to people who think it's "cute" but completely miss the arc of the story. Classic for anyone who watched the evolution of rock bands from the 60's to hair bands in the 80's. The "we are a hit in Japan" is completely lost on many 40 or younger.

Amazing. They bleeped out "q-u-e-u-e" and "s-t-o-n-e-d"

Uh, no. When I posted, I gave a one line reason as to "why" and prefer others do the same instead of just listing titles. So yeah, I asked your opinions in this thread and find many very interesting. Truly a "general discussion" about classic movies. Thanks Vautrin (are you an anti depressant?) for that Spiñal Tap clip-my favorite song of theirs. "It's not too late....nnnoooooo" I agree with THE GODFATHER. Finally saw it as an adult and was surprised at how good the story line was. I liked it a lot-but would NEVER ever watch it again-it was way too graphic & violent. That sort of gangster violence gives me nightmares. Once, I was urged to watch GOODFELLAS by my mother (!) and got sick within 20 minutes. Several of you avoid films because of a particular actor. Although there are a few I dislike, like Brando, I would never discount any film because they're in it. Sometimes a movie is better than the single actor you dislike. Case in point-SAVING MR BANKS in my queue despite my intense disdain of Tom Hanks. But it takes a lot to convince me to watch anything with Jim Carey in it. That said, I very much enjoyed BRUCE ALMIGHTY and MAN ON THE MOON and glad I braved watching them. And didn't I catch both Jorma K & Jack Casady together in a Hot Tuna revival a few years back? I was ushering the theater and got high off the smoke that emanated from their bus. Geesh, stoned hippie grandpas.

I agree, although only somewhat. I just returned from the Salt City Horror Festival where movies like this are screened all day in 35mm. Movies like THE LOST BOYS, POPCORN, FRIGHT NIGHT, TREMORS, etc. The audience whoops it up when the "bad guy" is finally killed off, it's like watching Underground with 300 people. Definitely the way to see these first! These films are truly worth seeing, if only for context, although many are pretty decently made & acted. (esp when compared to CGI movies of today) I never originally saw all those 80's schlock horror films that have since become cult favorites. To me, they are exactly the same as schlocky 50's horror (& sci-fi) in that they may not be great movies- they miss the mark somewhat- but they are fun entertainment. And reflect their times ie: 80's= teens sex, gory effects, music while 50's = atomic fears, aliens fears, mutation fears. I think the "usual" TCM viewer might be turned off by these films in prime time, not unlike silents, an acquired taste. Didn't they show some roller skating movie in Underground?

Wow lots of interesting responses! Andy, you rattled off so many genres, your classic film viewing must be narrow. I agree with most of Clore's choices, especially Preston Sturges, whom I've tried to like, but there's always just an element missing to make it "work". They're not bad, just not great. Almost exactly how I feel about Coen Bros. At least the Coen Bros TRY to make interesting innovative films, even if some fail overall. And at least they're not making comic book hero movies-yuk. Which brings me to John Ford. I can't stand his movies, mostly because of his directorial choices-he invariably makes opposite composition choices than you would expect. That really ruins the story flow for me. I wonder if he was "innovative" or just completely misses the mark? In any case, THE QUIET MAN is the only Ford movie with strong enough story & actors for me to enjoy it despite the klunky direction. WUTHERING HEIGHTS - Two hours of "I love you, I hate you, I love you, I hate you." That was pretty much our reaction watching it too. HoldenIsHere said : FORREST GUMP (in fact most any movie with Tom Hanks) Finally. A kindred spirit. Someone else who sees through this actor impostor. A few of you mentioned disliking singers: Howard Keel, Jeanette MacDonald & Katherine Grayson. I think singers is akin to comedians-a tough "sell" you either buy them or you don't. Also quite a few mentioned CITIZEN KANE, GUESS WHOS COMING TO DINNER, THE GRADUATE. I think some movies are tied to age & time. GWCTD is very dated in that taboo of interracial marriage is such a thing of the past, it's not even understandable by anyone under 30. A curio. Although I always enjoy pre-women's lib movies, "You're not going to drive yourself?" THE GRADUATE appeals to that same under 30 crowd, I think once you grow up and are into the adult world, it just seems like a implausible story. Also a film of it's "time", the 60's. And CITIZEN KANE alludes many of that same age group. I think it has much more impact on those who have been around the block a few times. So I'm a lover of KANE, BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI and some others mentioned here. But I wholly understand why many don't like them. Hey, I love 2001 A SPACY ODYSSEY & THE SHINING, two movies most people don't "get" at all.

The movies that come to mind because they are currently being discussed on this board: DR ZHIVAGO - I don't find adultery particularly moving RANDOM HARVEST- really? I don't believe this plot for a second CASABLANCA- an ok movie, but not anything special There's always arguments over comedians - comedy is so much a matter of taste that there will always be divisions over the movies of Red Skelton, Danny Kaye, Jerry Lewis, etc. MissWonderly pointed out she doesn't really like GWTW and thinks it's overrated. I love it, so that's more of what I'm talking about. Dare to be different and respect others' opinions, please.

New board....same ole complaints.... common error for people to think that the years of a century start with the first year related to that century Yeah, I recently had to explain that to a kid: the first century was "one, two, three...to ten" and the second century started with 11-simple when you think of it that way.

Then how do you feel about the black charactors in IMITATION OF LIFE? The black mother just about begged the white mother to work for her without pay just for a "nice place for her & daughter to stay". I realize it's not "property ownership", but desperate people do desperate things to survive. Scarlett was RAISED by Mammy (as was her mother) and she definitely had a decent familial relationship with her. Polk had zero education and could not survive on his own "I ain't no field hand, Ize a house slave" so Scarlett kept him as family. Remember her giving Polk Pa's watch? In GWTW's case, I like the wide ranging depiction of slave ownership, reactions of the women to war (even better in SINCE YOU WENT AWAY) and the change in social mores for women brought on by circumstance. I do not see the **** depicted as "good guys". But it illustrates why some justified the formation, organization. They imagined all hell was going to break loose when slaves were freed and saw themselves as "peacekeepers". (sadly, this attitude continues) GWTW does not take ONE point of view about anything, each charactor represents different aspects of various attitudes about war, slavery, manners, feminism & family.

I think that's how most of us feel-we just avoid their work. Their presence just ruins the movie for us. In the long run, time will heal the wounds of the offense, especially when/if social mores change. I'm sure there were those who couldn't watch Joan Crawford or Ingrid Bergman 20-30 years ago. Now their "crimes" are anecdotal, most think nothing of it. I absolutely refuse to spend a penny on anything from the Disney monopoly (post Walt years) I also never set foot in a Wal*Mart. Or buy into the cable/high speed internet hype. That's just how I choose where to spend my dollars based on their business practices, I just can't be a part of them. They are so huge it makes not a whit of difference until others jump on the bandwagon.

Just wanted to add that as perverse as Woody Allen may be in his personal life, his films are certainly restrained. Even when the actual subject of the film is sex, as in A MIDSUMMER NIGHT SEX COMEDY ('82) and VICKY CRISTINA BARCELONA('08) there is no nudity or crass off color language. Woody Allen films don't include much to offend my mother, nor embarrass me in front of a teen. It just goes to show a good movie can be made without: •super special effects •sex •bad language •tired rock & roll hits Rather than judge the guy on his personal mores, I'd rather judge his work. Who knows what went on in that household? Although it strikes me as kind of weird, he did nothing illegal, it's really none of my business.

It's "dyed" haired woman. Obscure? You must not be over 40. Everything evolves. Back in Scarlett's day, personal ornamentation was limited to fancy clothing & jewelry. Maybe face powder. Any woman who "painted" herself with color (even lip rouge) or wore anything considered TOO fancy would be considered kind of loose morally. Dying your hair would be for prostitutes only, which Belle Watling was. No one SAID so (not very genteel) but it was implied by her carriage, where she lived, her clothing, etc. Scarlett walked the line of being a well bred woman/white trash often in the film which shocks others in the story but often goes unnoticed by modern viewers. Just to show how quickly social morays change-I'm a 53 y/o woman who loved shocking my parents with my pink hair punk rock trashy clothes. But I am shocked to see young girls of today covering themselves with tattoos. In my day only a lady in the circus looked like that-as a commodity. I don't much like it on men either, but tattoos have always been a sign of machismo. (at least the wearer thinks so)

Exactly. Conversation completed. (there is an entire subcategory devoted to THE ESSENTIALS....why isn't this thread there?)

MissW, I too just love that scene in HAHS when he walks into the theater and muses over the Marx Brothers movie. I like that he uses the word "absurdity" to describe human life. Also recall Allen's PURPLE ROSE OF CAIRO ends in a movie theater with the lead charactor watching Astaire & Rogers dancing in the CHEEK TO CHEEK number. A perfect touch. My favorite line from HAHS that always kills me is when the Allen charactor whines to his assistant & friend, "cause it hit me, all right, so, you know, I'm not going to go today I'm not going to go tomorrow, but eventually, I'm going to DIE." And Kavner replies, "You're just realizing this now?" I love the utter horror and simplicity of that scene. Kavner's delivery of the line is perfect. Kind of like Bob Newhart's sketch of the psychiatrist- when the client complains about his life Newhart simply states, "Well, get over it."

Ha! Bet there's a few here (won't name names) which are THRILLED there are now all sorts of "popularity" indicators like the hot button, "friend" lists & uber post counts. I just never understood the appeal of being "popular" or "hot" in a virtual community. MsHead, is your avatar Liz Taylor's flowered dress from A PLACE IN THE SUN?

Thanks KidDabb, but those settings are only to view your OWN posts, not the entire thread. The moderator stated elsewhere there currently is no way to set your preferences to view "oldest (original) post first". So for now, we'll just have to wait until they resolve it, if ever. (but I'm glad I'm not the only one who likes to read in chronological order-on a long thread I just choose to view the last page)

I really like Indian culture, brought into it through Indian film-a huge industry! I couldn't wait to see GHANDI when it was first broadcast TCM as I had never seen it in the theater. It's one of those movies I'll never watch again. It seemed long, drawn out and somewhat tough to watch...although glad I saw it once.

I set the "custom" bar to sort by: "last post" and sort direction: "descending (Z-A)" and the thread TITLES appear correctly. I tried reversing the sort direction to "ascending (A-Z)" but this did not change the posts, only the threads. I also tried changing the "sort by" choices, but they didn't make a difference either. There seems to be no way to get the posts WITHIN the thread to appear in order by time & date posted. When you open the thread by the grey spot to the left of the thread title (go to first unread post) the thread still opens last post first. It's mostly because for some reason the posts are numbered (wow big improvement :-P) but the LAST post is #1 and the first (original opening) post is #32 (if there are 32 posts within the thread) Who wants to read the answer before the question?

Along with many new features, this upgrade seems very "clunky" to me. (oh goody, now I can see a poster's avatar & where they live and there's little cute icons that tell me who's "hot"- who cares?) What happened to the instant log-in? (dumbed down name: remember me) I do not see a quick "sign in" link on tcm.com either. These were time savers for sure. The "custom" set up of LAST POST and ASCENDING Z-A is the only setting that makes the last thread appear first on the list, which is great. But when I open a thread it's the last posting first in the list with the OP buried on the last page. Why assign NUMBERS to a post? The last post is numbered ONE, not TWENTY ONE if there's 21 post count. So they are numbered backwards? Has anyone figured out HOW to ascend posts by most recent date/time? Sorry if this sounds like a rant. It's confusing following threads when the answer is before the question.

test (ah summer)

Thanks SanFin...so good to see who has made it to "the other side" here. If you click directly on your small images they link to a larger version that can be clearly viewed. Which option do we select to "ascend" posts from oldest to newest?

>Maybe they were just being pretentious in their selections and made the fatal mistake of not actually watching the film they're supposed to be gushing about to Robert Osborne. It's called "name recognition" and it happens more than we want to think. Sadly, 90% of elections are won by those who "get their name out there" doesn't matter if in a positive or negative way. A movie theater around here has "polls" as to what classic movie the audience would want to see come to the theater next. Sadly, what "wins" are often terrible movies, but familiar titles. In other words, for a Hitchcock night, THE BIRDS and NBNW won votes over STRANGERS ON A TRAIN or REBECCA - much better films (imho) but lesser known titles to the general movie going public.