Tikisoo

finance-the CHAMPAGNE FOR CAESER I watched was a DVD. It was my first viewing and I loved it! (and I'm not a Ronald Coleman fan) I especially liked that the parrot was Price's in the end. And we took TikiKid to see HOUSE OF WAX in 3D 35mm at the Eastman House a few years back. I had seen it when I was her age and it had the same magical effect on her as it did me. She once came to me and said, "Did you know Vincent Price was in a Michael Jackson video?" Heh. I've got a request out for DVD WATCHFINDER GENERAL too, thanks MrW.

>Why did Dan and Alice never Kissed in 3:10 to Yuma? Because they one has Eat a cheeseburger in Dinner @ 8

>newbie said: Norma wanted a younger guy and did whatever she could to keep him and buy him off. You're kind of missing the point. Norma doesn't want a younger man intentionally. Norma does not see the huge gap in their respective ages, she has very little acceptance that she herself has aged. >The weak link in the film was the Nancy Olsen character. I didn't think she really fit the role too well - or Jack Webb. When I think of "supporting actors", I think of these two roles (as well as Bruno Kirby & Carrie Fisher in WHEN HARRY MET SALLY) which I think are superb! They truly "support" the story! The supporting couple mirror the doomed Joe & Norma charactors relationship, only the "let's do things the right way, it's better" example. It's illustrating Joe's and Norma's "slippery slope" attitude towards morality ending in death. I think both Jack Webb & Nancy Olsen were perfect for their parts. It was nice to see Webb acting happy as compared to his stone faced Joe Friday portrayal. And Nancy Olsen was sweet but serious. I thought her confusion upon discovering Norma and subsequent hurt realizing the man she has fallen in love with is a weak coward...was perfectly portrayed. >Great movie and discussion on this thread. I agree, and I hope you're not offended by my 2?.

>He played along with a fruitcake in letting her believe she had a comeback in her future, her in that once she got him in there, she took more and more of his life and identity outside of her. Since Norma Desmond was delusional, she wasn't really aware she was doing anything wrong-this was normal life for her. Joe, OTOH was wholly aware he was taking advantage of her feelings for him, but thought he could play with fire and remain unscathed, as does most people in their 20's. He thought he could beat the odds but once he realized how dangerous the situation was, he was already trapped! That's why the Nancy Olsen visit scene was so poignant. He is admitting his entrapment to her. What makes this film really great though is the segment when Norma visits the studio. I love hearing the whispers, "Norma Desmond!" and the overhead shot of the crew gathering around her in admiration. The spot on her face and the boom mike nudging her were the most touching & brilliant part of this movie for me. It helps illustrate Norma's greatness, she's not just a whacko.

Just watched CHAMPAGNE FOR CEASER where Vinnie played a comic charactor brilliantly! He was over-the-top but so funny & wonderful as the president of Milady Soap Co. He could "tune out" and absolutely freeze and at other times use his entire body to convey his evil spoiledness. You just know the cast had a blast making this movie-it shows! (Vincent Price is teen TikiKid's favorite classic actor, along with Cagney)

>...anything involving "spiritualism" is a fraud, and, in some cases by their replies, have gotten away from the thread's original concentration which was upon the spirit world. OK, so if you are looking for the first movie to feature a "real" ghost, in the classic sense, it's been said THE UNINVITED is the first. And by this meaning a "real ghost" as a charactor. (not a fraud ghost created by another charactor) I just finished seeing THE TESTAMENT OF DR MEBUSE" (toldja, on a Fritz Lang kick) and there were "ghostly figures" but the figure represented mental powers, not a real ghost. Still, it was pretty eerie when the shadowy figure stepped onto a real man's body as if to "possess" him. My favorite seance sequence is from I LOVE LUCY when Lucy & Fred both pose as "Tillie" which turns out to be a dog, not the guy's wife. I love Viv acting like a radio operator, "Tillie, contacting Tillie. Do you read me Tillie?"

>This thread just reminded me, what ever happened to that old horror film "Gargoyles" (1972)? I loved that film! It was in heavy rotation on the Saturday kid's movie on local TV. Wasn't there a scene in the cave where the monsters were plotting against the humans and as the departed, one Gargoyle pats the other on the fanny like a football player? I remember shrieking in laughter as a young teen seeing that.

When I saw this thread I knew it was right up my alley-I have a penchant for fakery, carney, gypsy fortune teller movies, as I am descendent of these people. Was that picture Lugosi as Roxor in CHANDU THE MAGICIAN? The CLAIRVOYANT with Claude Rains is a fave, glad it was mentioned. I also very much like THE CRYSTAL BALL and THE CAT & CANARY (with Paulette Goddard) WHEN WERE YOU BORN (with Anna Mae Wong) As a kid I was always disturbed by the Ouija scene in Bill Castle's 13 GHOSTS. Disturbed by a Bill Castle movie, sheesh. Who doesn't love Frank Morgan as Professor Marvel & the goofy (brilliantly portrayed by Jeffrey Jones) Criswell in Ed Wood films. But of course, the greatest ballyhooer was Houdini. And he made a serial now available on DVD by Kino. Thanks for the MINISTRY OF FEAR tip. I've been on a Fritz Lang kick and will have to watch it next week.

I just finished watching two Joan Crawford films, DAISY KENYON and SUDDEN FEAR neither of which will be shown on TCM. I was really impressed with Joan's acting in both films, (although long in the tooth for the roles) she was really a good actress & pulled it off. I think her role in THE WOMEN perfectly suited her, she definitely added to the film. Although I think MILDRED PIERCE was her best performance, DAISY KENYON makes a perfect "double feature" to go along with it. I'm just kind of puzzled as to why she's such an icon to gay men. Is it because she looks kind of mannish? (all women look mannish as they age, while as men age they seem more womanly)

>directed by THE HUNGER GAMES director Gary Ross Aw, I am so sorry to hear once promising director Ross has succumbed to making this teen driven dreck. I imagined him as the next Capra when he did his own stuff. Guess we all have to eat.

As a kid I would get Harris completely mixed up with Clifton Webb. They still seem pretty similar to me: spoiled mama's boy with a hefty dose of lavender.

I love what both Andy & mrroberts said so eloquently! For myself, Vincent Price brings a sexy handsome quality to roles which makes him seem all the more dangerous! His obvious glee in having power over others comes across just as well in his non-horror roles such as in Dragonwyk. I find the well educated, mannered, sensitive & elegant part of his real persona add to his horror roles too. But with or without his mustache and even into old age, he was definitely a handsome man!

I have experienced no problems with this message board being slow. I'm on a Mac using an old version of Safari...and I'm on a DIAL UP connection! Some of the top menu fonts don't format correctly, but I can read & post just fine.

Thanks hamradio....perfect comment! I love when people post a photo as their comment....one of my favorites (as some ay know) in any "complaint" thread: I've never had to use one of these on the TCM boards, although it fits a few: >Andy said: This is exactly the sort of derailment that takes place routinely on other sites and it's a perfect example of the point I was making last night. Yup. Back on topic: Another reason I like these boards is the discussion of films I may never have seen before. We have a lot of regulars on this board who have specific interests....like JamesJazzGuitar. I've always wanted to know his opinion of the movie about Chet Baker LETS GET LOST. Worth seeing?

Your post was perfect, Andy...well said. I've been a participant in internet message boards since 1994 on an old SE30 Mac. I've seen boards evolve, devolve, implode and die from bullies, spam, disinterest and infighting. We are drawn together because of our interest in classic film, and that offers many different levels of participation. At best we are enjoying the "party" and learning from other's opinions and experiences since the majority of posters maintain a respectable level of intelligence & maturity. At worst we tolerate the know-it-alls, the bad grammar, the shouting newbies while true disrupters are escorted out and "ignored". Definitely internet Darwinism.

Isn't it funny? When you speak among other classic film fans, you realize just how vast the sheer number of films made. It's great there is always more to discover... On a Fritz Lang kick and saw WOMAN IN THE WINDOW last night for the first time-wonderful! I kept marveling over that ultra sexy woman also played the refined mother in FATHER OF THE BRIDE. SUDDEN FEAR is the next logical choice-thanks for the mention. sewhite: The Greatest Show on Earth You gotta like schlocky musicals (I do) This movie is corny, but that goes along with the subject. Sepiatone: MY LITTLE CHICKADEE Just awful despite the stellar leads. Worst picture made by each of them. See WINGS instead. LonesomePolecat-you've never seen PSYCHO? Get it. Today. It's almost impossible to dislike. (One of my favorite costumes for Halloween is Baby Jane Hudson. I wear a blonde wig with bows, her funny make up and carry a giant 18" rubber rat in a small picnic basket!)

It's tough to sit down and get excited for a movie that's outside your usual genre. I've never seen many classic westerns and war films only because it's not what I'll reach for first. (I'll always pick a musical or pre-code) A theater setting is great for that, I saw THE SEVEN SAMURAI in the theater and it was great. I could never watch it home alone. I've been getting classics from the library and finally saw DAISY KENYON-wow. Some on the list are: HOW THE WEST WAS WON CRISS CROSS PRIDE OF THE MARINES Just dedicate some time for CITIZEN KANE. It IS a fantastic film and really just a great story of a man's life, his loves, his mistakes. I think most people can identify with it. The "effects" and the way it looks is secondary to the story, but gorgeous storytelling.

>JJG said: I find this statement hard to believe: Talk to most cable subscribers and they'll confirm the "classic movie" channel is their most watched. When asking my neighbors & coworkers about cable, that's what they say, (not realizing I'm a cinephile) along with the History or Science channels. I think many people see "classic movies" as elitist and classy and want to be thought better of than the sort who watches "My Strange Addiction" or "Dancing With The Stars" >Most of my friends never watch TCM. They watch sports, network TV stations or movie channels that show recent movies. I think that's probably closer to the truth, although I do think many are sucked into TCM when channel surfing and then realize how satisfying watching a classic movie is. This is why it's good TCM shows GASLIGHT and other "introductory" type movies. >The people at this forum do NOT represent the general cable viewing public. That is something to be proud of. See? TCM has replaced PBS as the "intellectual, artistic" choice.

With the economy the way it's been and most people having to cut back on expenses, cable is really shooting themselves in the foot. Talk to most cable subscribers and they'll confirm the "classic movie" channel is their most watched. TCM wasn't worth $100+/month to me, but most of the reason I discontinued cable was I hated being part of their cash cow. Cable serves up a lot of insulting crap-pap that I just couldn't support any more. You can watch sports & PBS for nothing. The library has tons of classic DVDs available-many which are not shown on TCM like Fox movies. I'm still amazed how many dopes continue paying cable's high prices for mostly pap, but see an awful lot more dishes these days.

Well said Sepia. (my opinion of course) As we all know, posting on an internet message board has it's own set of 'netticate apart from RL (real life) mostly because it's in writing without inflection and it's not instant like RL conversation. People have a tendency to state their opinion as fact, ie "anything after 1960 is not a classic" or "TCM shows XXX too often or at a terrible time slot" and that sort of thing. It's much better to say something to the effect: "I just don't understand the genius of Hitchcock....can anyone explain?" rather than "I hate that loser Hitchcock" as it's inviting conversation rather than shutting the door on anyone else's opinion. Mostly, this indicates the poster thinks only within their own world and little of others feelings or opinions-something personal computer devices promote, sadly. Good social skills come with time, practice & mistakes, as does good 'netticate. "I don't like a man with too many muscles" "I didn't make him...for YOU!"

I love that picture, tracey. I find it interesting we are discussing the differences between Katherine Hepburn's beauty (tall, slim, firm) to Elizabeth Taylor's beauty (softer & rounder) in 2013 when the ideal beauty is the ultra tall gaunt model seen in media! This could be an ad today: Kate just didn't have a soft feminine attitude, which I love her for. I like Kate for the same reasons I like Lauren Bacall... This is precisely why S,LS was so perfectly cast. Vi is an aging smart sophisticated beauty pushed aside by lusty/young/sweet Catherine -everything Vi isn't. Liz Taylor simply was the epitome of gorgeousness-especially in this movie. PS just looked at the imdb page for this & saw Eddie Fisher was an uncredited street urchin-ew

I'm with Andy on this one, Fred. I love MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT and find the couple's romance bittersweet & worth watching as it unfolds. First both charactors resist involvement feeling uncomfortable with the age difference and especially the boss/employee taboo. Then once involved, they realize none of that is more important than how they feel about each other. It's much the same story as GUESS WHO'S COMING TO DINNER. And all the time the audience sees how really good they are for each other. Loved it. It certainly doesn't hurt having great Chayefsky writing and stellar performances by both Novak & March. It's just petty to judge the charactors on their "looks".

Mickey Rooney is the most talented person alive...Happy Birthday! I'm sure glad his talent has been captured on film for several generations to enjoy! We love you, Mick!

For all of you who cannot picture Katherine Hepburn as "bait", you need to realize men pretty much will look at anything, especially on a beach! If you are tall, lithe and full of yourself as the Mrs Venerable charactor was, with some decent costuming (expensive bathing suit, large hat with flowing scarf, strappy sandals) along with a happy expression, flowing hair and walking with attitude, you can attract a throng of interested followers. Doesn't really matter if you're pretty, just as long as you *think* you're pretty. Thinness generally is equated with youth, so no one really noticed her age until up close and then too late! The major part of the story is Mrs Venerable's jealousy realizing she's so easily replaced by Liz's charactor, both in youth and closeness to Sebastian. She has zero empathy for any "victims" because it's all about her own vanity.

>Does anyone know if Joe was doing what was best for Betty by sending her away from Norma's house? I didn't know if he was trying to do good by her, or if he really is a super cad. None of us KNOW, but Joe definitely did not strike me as a cad at all. I imagined Joe was ashamed Betty discovered his secret. He literally sold his life away, which is why the party scene with his old friends was so touching. This is the tragedy of the story-poor Norma has been coddled & fooled all her life and has no idea of reality. Her flaw comes in the form of manipulation, and I'm not even sure she's aware she's doing anything wrong. It's always worked for her in the past. Poor Joe just wants a job and he'll take whatever opportunity arises. Sad he misjudged the situation, thought he could just work & be paid. Both charactors slide down a slippery slope. It's tragic because we all see how easily this scenario can happen.