Tikisoo
-
Posts
9,238 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Posts posted by Tikisoo
-
-
We've lost our numbering system here...so I'll jump right in-
I've learned not to fear being shot by a gun, no matter how close or large the caliber. I certainly will die, but I'll have plenty of time to confess and tie the story up nicely first. (re:This Gun For Hire)
And in the same vein, I must be watched over by an angel because I survive falling off a horse regularly, and most certainly everyone else dies when thrown off a horse.
I've also learned I am a total failure as a homemaker. It takes me HOURS to plan & prepare a meal and it never looks like the candlelit formal dinners I see instantly appear in movies. I'm a wreck, the kitchen is a wreck and there's _so many_ dirty dishes!
I learned that women's breasts defied gravity and had no nipples before 1950. They will be roused out of bed wearing flimsy nighties and appear fully clothed. (and wearing full make-up!)
-
Mark, YOU RULE!
It is so much better that you give us the heads up a week ahead of broadcasts. Nothing is worse than reading, "Did anyone see the awesome movie XXX yesterday?"
Thanks for the quickie synopsis or cast overview to help me choose what to record and what to skip. We seem to be on the same wavelength...Marie Dressler, James Gleason, Alan Hale, etc.
I would have NEVER noticed the Harlow "Girl From Missouri" or "Sansho Dayu" listings if not brought up in this thread.
Last time I looked at the "groove hard" thread, I ended up bringing several RWs on vacation (no TCM) and my entire family LOVED everything I brought! (and I haven't recorded over them)
-
I'm really surprised so many responders feel Robinson is "playing against type" in this film.
I don't see Edward G Robinson as a "tough guy gangster" type- same as I don't see Cagney as one although they both played them beautifully.
My fave EGR roles, he plays a sweetheart; Double Indemnity, Our Vines Have Tender Grapes, Scarlet St and I'd think you've all seen those too.
Maybe he's most memorable as a tough guy, but I just don't see him that way at all.
-
I saw Scarlet Street last time it aired and liked it so much I recorded it this broadcast while at work. I like Fritz Lang films a LOT and guess I have enough to make a box set.
-
I guess nobody here reads posts (or maybe I don't articulate well) but I addressed the "teen angst" appeal of this movie earlier.
Looking at this movie as experienced adults and trying to transport ourselves into the past, remembering "what the world was like" in the 50's, it can be difficult to fully appreciate this movie & easy to criticize.
I recently watched a "teen angst" movie THE BREAKFAST CLUB with a 15 year old. I thought is was ok but predictable and sometimes whiney. I found the clothes & music pretty cute but only because I lived through that time.
The 15 y/o otoh, thought it was the best movie she ever saw. She totally identified with the kids actions & attitudes. She paid zero attention to the clothing & music, it wasn't "dated" for her at all.
I would venture to guess RWAC is the same sort of thing. If WE were teens, we'd identify with the angst and most likely not even notice the nostalgia aspect. If that was the time period when we grew up, we'd experience some nostalgia, but not enough to think it was a "great" movie.
Does this make a film "dated"? Or are WE the ones who are "dated"?
-
Amazingly, my favorite of the week was the Stephen King interview about horror films. I think he is a very thoughtful, well spoken man who truly enjoys the genre and whose writing is often streotyped "horror" just like films.
My only criticism is WHY does every filmmaker feel the need to include "chapter titles"? You can use them for editing purposes, but it just stops the flow of a documentary when kept in the final cut.
The worst film I saw was last night's THE BAD SEED. I had heard so much about it, how good it was and was psyched to catch it in a perfect time slot for me to watch.
What a horrible, stagey rotten film that was!
The story could have been ok, but the acting was stilted, everyone read their lines off meter, especially the mother. It almost could have been excused for the daughter, making her seem calculated. But the mother's ragings were downright comical. And the drunken mother of the killed boy, man was she off the wall!
The camera work did nothing to tell the story, it just followed single performers, coming off as totally weird looking.
THE BAD SEED makes JOHNNY GUITAR seem like a masterpiece.
-
Remember, Archie Bunker was in the 70's. We laughed, but we all knew people like that.
Hey, my parents were against me sharing an apartment with my best friend (we are 2 diff races) way back in the 80's. They feared we'd be a "target". Silly, but true.
GWCTD? subject is "dated" only when seen for the first time by a younger person because interracial marriage in the US is pretty commonplace today. It's a great tool for teaching them how far we have come. (and how far we need to go!)
Race is not the only focus of this movie, but the dynamics of family and practicing your own morality & INTEGRITY are really the subject.
Some of my favorite films are Busby Berkeley musicals and nothing is more "dated" than that. Younger people can enjoy the songs & dance patterns while not even realizing how risque the costumes & poses were for the day. Do _I_ even realize how it effected audiences of the day? Probably not.
-
>I agree with you about that scene.
When I saw it just now, my skin crawled because
I knew that I had seen it before
That was a 'creepy' scene that just pops out of
the blue.
And empty hotel hallways had me on 'edge' after
seeing this movie, too.
I was amazed when I realized the interiors were entirely a set!
And that's why I think it's such a great movie-it works like a nightmare-fast quick cuts of scary random images that creep you out in the deepest ways. The image of the kid screaming with no sound? Oy. A guy in a animal costume is creepy on one level...and most of us have interrupted parental sex acts, horrifying for all involved.
Although it has it's faults, it's an amazing piece of film making.
>He did not deserve to be slapped by a limited talent, has-been movie star with a huge ego like Burt Reynolds.
-
>I dare say that most, or all of the movies produced between the 1920s to the 1980s are dated. So what? That's part of their charm.
So you don't like RWAC. No big deal.
It was a huge hit, and an influential movie for decades. Like it or not, James Dean became a legend based only on 3 films. Quite an acheivement.
I like what you said there bOb.
Younger people call GUESS WHOS COMING TO DINNER dated, but since I lived through that era, understand it better.
I never knew life before "teenagers", so imagining RWAC as "influential" is more difficult.
James Dean just comes off as a goofy whining weiner to me. Juvie Delinquent films are just about my favorite genre too, but I just never liked RWAC for some reason. No big deal, just my taste/opinion.
It IS amazing as you say, that Dean was such a "legend" after so few films.
I recently watched THE BREAKFAST CLUB for the first time and thought it was "cute" but forgettable for the most part (except the music & clothes were a hoot!) Our 14 y/o thought it was the best thing she ever saw.
-
>The opinions of Jonny Geetar are solely the opinions of Jonny Geetar, he still can't stand Luise Rainer, The Films of Frank Capra and the 1967 production of Camelot. SansFin- your impassioned defense was excellent. I still hate this movie with a passion, but I get where you're coming from. Just ignore me, everyone else does.
Hey, I LIKE your respectful exchange JG and hope I can be as diplomatic. I love Capra, but can totally understand why others hate him. And I can wax poetic about the greatness of 2001 while others shake their heads.
I had CAMELOT on yesterday while working around the house and sat down a few times to catch the costumes. I generally love musicales but L&L and R&H can leave me cold. They sang some song and I thought, "This is terrible...I wonder if anyone likes this film?"
So I'm glad there was this thread, especially the impassioned OP. I'll give it a try next time it airs. (and feel equally ok if I still don't like it)
-
I hung around with some friends in a band a awhile back & was surprised to see the majority of their following, spoiled kids approx 20-30 y/o routinely took acid. Pills seem to be very popular with the younger crowd and they don't seem to have any fear of it like we did as kids in the 60's-70's. I saw a lot of kids sleeping through parties & shows.
MrTiki is in law enforcement and he says injectable drugs once only used by inner city bums is now filtering it's way into mainstream suburbia.
-
Might I suggest you join a film club already in progress?
Binghamton is close by & has a fantastic group that screens a film per month at the University.
Syracuse has the unequaled Cinefile Society that screens every Monday in the spring & autumn as well as the Cinefest marathon in March.
A bit of a trek but worth it is also the historic Capitol Theater in Rome NY that screens classic film regularly as well as their own film festival CapitolFest in August.
And you can't forget the Dryden Theater at the Eastman House in Rochester that houses the Selznick Film Restoration and screens classic film 6 days a week.
Any of those organizations would love to have you as a participating member!
PS-I'm guessing you meant your collection is "movies". Within these groups "film" means actual reels of film. If you actually collect FILM, these groups would REALLY enjoy your participation!
-
Captain Kangaroo was an institution, what a great show.
I was scared to the core when I saw this:
...because all I could think of was Dancing Bear!
-
I'm glad you wrote that Andy because I saw both Louise Brooks films you mentioned at the theater and was bored by them. I even overheard audience members complaining at how slowly paced they were. I've recorded Pandora's Box but just couldn't bring myself to watch it.
My favorite silent drama is The Cabinat of Dr Caligari. I think that's a visual feast.
-
I like this thread!
I think I can separate the actor from the role for the most part. I think our immediate likes/dislikes more often happen because of people's appearance or mannerisms. Many love/hate June Allyson because of her smoky voice, Jean Tierney for her aforementioned overbite and villans for their lack of eye contact. Villans who smile & enjoy cruelty are particularly evil!
My intro to Ernie Borgnine was the same as above poster...comedy then Marty. I was shocked, shocked by his nasty roles in both From Here To Eternity and later Bad Day At Black Rock. He is totally amazing.
My first introduction of Richard Widmark & William Holden were from the old I Love Lucy episodes when she went to Hollywood. Both actors humored Lucy's stalking and seemed like nice guys. Whoa, then I saw Widmark as a nasty guy in a movie and was taken aback!
>No, but on the inverse, I do hate Lee Marvin because of the pig he was in real life.
And he started that long held rumor about Bob "Capt Kangaroo" Keeshon
>And then there's Jim Carrey, whom I hate on sight simply because he's the worst actor in the world.
But Carrey did a great job playing the worst comedian in the world, Andy Kaufman
>Followed closely by Tom Cruise.
Wow, there's a lot of hate in your world. They're just people.
-
I respectfully disagree, or want to elaborate on your comment, Jonas.
Yes, the acting style is "exactly the same" but the experience is wholly different. Often silent film is pantomime. You can't be distracted.
My studio is located next to my living room (with the TV) I often "listen" to TCM while working. Many, many films are "dialogue driven" and I don't even need to watch them. 99% of the time, the actors convey meaning through their lines. I recently listened to IT HAPPENED ON 5TH AVENUE for example. It was fine.
You really notice actor's voice style this way. Eve Arden comes to mind.
I also noticed while watching Buster Keaton, I hear his distinctive voice in my head, odd.
And really, no one says you HAVE to like any genre. I understand those who don't care for silents, or horror, epics or whatever.
-
>Ouch! Sexist.
Why did you say that?
Because they are "good classic film building blocks" for *anyone.*
I also tried to edit my post to say, "exposure" instead of "learning tool" since we don't want to sound like we're ramming "what's good for kids" down their throat.
I think kids instinctively like film since it's an illustrated story. I know that's why *I* like film, especially when there's something left to interpretation.
-
I can completely understand anyone's dislike of silent film watching them on TV.
For whatever reason, silents are best first experienced in a theater setting with an audience. Maybe the size immerses you into the screen, maybe hearing the audience reaction helps, I don't know.
Silents are pantomime, not unlike cartoons. They do not rely on "talky" dialogue but instead on movement. Some early silents, especially dramas can bore me, they are often just too slowly paced.
I find Chaplin & Keaton are the easiest to watch since they are fast moving and have funny bits. I am surprised at their watchability even at home.
-
Ahh, a subject close to home. TikiKid came into my life at 10 y/o, and five years later she is still figuring out why the parents are so into "old b&w" movies.
> I agree with Clore's recommendation of The Invisible Man or any of the major Universal monster flicks. Those are always good classic film building blocks for boys.
Ouch! Sexist.
And I agree this type of film is easily likable for those coming into the fold. I also agree with the Keaton suggestion. I've noticed she enjoys the pantomime quality of silents (esp Chaplin) reminiscent of cartoons. "Talky" films can lose her.
Along the same lines as Universal Horror, broad dramatic actors really capture her interest. Cagney is a fave... Angels With Dirty Faces is in the queue.
Mystery Science Theater 3000 has opened TikiKid's interest in film to now include "bad" horror like The Killer Shrews. It's another great teaching tool.
Short & quickly moving are two things to look for when introducing the younger set to film. Just provide them with the best of every genre; the kid once told me she HATED musicals. I showed her Cabin In The Sky & Singin' In The Rain. She loved them both!
I also find taking her to a film in a theater trumps anything on DVD. Yay! This Fri - Frankenstein '31 on 35mm!
-
Wow Dobsy, first you make perfect sense:
>These are just personal opinions. Many opinions vary because we are talking about movie art.
...and then you say:
>Citizen Kane is mostly a guy's movie.
"Overrated" is a response to other's opinions-YOU can think whatever you want.
I agree with the poster who said they enjoyed Schickel's "Men Who Made The Movies" but his writing is "meh". I have an absolutely horrible book of his the used bookstore won't even take.
I love Citizen Kane and many of the other "over-rate-eds" mentioned here (and I'm female)
While other films, heralded as "great", I simply don't care for. I don't need to ever see Dr Zhivago again.But I'd never talk anyone out of watching it themselves and might even give it another try if offered a 35mm projection in a theater.
Critics have a right to say whatever their educated opinion is (the one poster said "flimsy" to evidence provided, ha!) and to Schickel, the hoopla over some film eludes him.
So what?
-
I started out watching old films because I was a "latchkey" kid in the 70's. I loved the Crosby/Hope films, Cagney, classic horror, Busby Berkeley...the stuff they showed on TV.
By the time I was in High School, I was skipping class to join "Senior's Matinee" at the Eastman House to see Chaplin, Keaton, & other early stuff not seen on TV.
As an adult, yes, classic film became my field of interest and talking to my Mom about "what it used to be like" was definitely a bond. Her story of skipping school to see GWTW and seeing her aunt in the audience was a memorable one. I loved Marilyn musical comedies and my Mom found her terribly unfunny & trashy. What's on TCM is often topic of discussion on the phone. (my siblings & I buy her a year of cable for Christmas)
Now poor 14 y/o TikiKid has to endure a lot of "old b&w" films, many of which she can't even follow. I always feel triumphant when it "clicks" for her, like Singin' In The Rain & Sunset Blvd. She liked accompanying me to Cinefest and surprisingly enjoys silents! I think it's the pantomime visual quality, not unlike cartoons.
I know when she's an adult, it will sink in. But for now the last new thing she saw (like Harry Potter) will be "the best". But I find everything we see "new" is forgotten very quickly and the "classics" we see she'll refer to again & again.
-
While I simply adore Margaret O'Brien, I have to think the greatest child star of all time has to be Shirley Temple. (I'm sure MO'B has to be sick of hearing that comparison)
I'd love to see Margaret O'Brian on a PRIVATE SCREENINGS by herself. She is a simply gorgeous adult, very composed and sweet...exactly the same as in her childhood. While Margaret's impact wasn't quite as great, she's still very well loved & admired.
For that matter, I'd love to see Shirley Temple interviewed by Robert Osborne. I do not understand why Ms Black stays out of the public eye, we all still love her and wholly appreciate the HUGE contribution she has made to American film history.
The only thing I can think of is that so much time has passed, their memories of golden Hollywood must have faded or been clouded by other's recollections.
Really, how many of us could remember interesting details from when we were 5-11 years old?
-
>It very well looks very hopeful that something is definately developing, after the blind girl's realization that it was the little tramp who paid for her operation to gain sight.
How could they NOT start a relationship? If someone paid for YOUR operation, you'd be grateful & curious as to why a stranger would do that. And to see them as a "tramp"...you'd wonder how they got there. And in a karma sort of way, it's her turn to help him, isn't it?
I love movies (& any story) that leads to discussion afterward. Discussion makes the film part of you and therefore you become part of the story!
I have a silk screen of Chaplin holding the rose and print it on shirts often. I am aghast when someone does not even recognise who it is. I am delighted however when someone says, "Oh Chaplin with the rose...City Lights!"
-
>Some would argue that my TV is to small, (13 inches) but I don't think that should matter.
Aw geez, you just make it too easy...
>My ideal font is the one on the 1966 Batman series.
If we were all at a party together . . .
in Hot Topics
Posted
I have been to parties populated by members of an internet message board wearing my "TikiSoo" badge.
The biggest problem was the group centered around friends of mine in a band and although the members of the band are family men in their 40's, the FANS were younger crazy party hounds. Much centered around drugs & alcohol and it became very boring very fast.
I would venture to guess our superior TCM group here would be much more mature and interesting. There's a few of us with oddball careers & lifestyles, some even involved in the film industry, some with huge "collections", an eclectric group.
You can tell by the posts, no one is here to impress anyone else, it's more of a friendly discussion (often detailed or technical) and since our interest is "old fashioned" for the most part, so are we.
I count the people from this board that I know in RL to be some of the most intelligent, polite, thoughtful, knowledgeable (yeah & good looking) people I know.
So there!