Tikisoo

> {quote:title=hamradio wrote:}{quote} > We are simply getting *old.* We are sounding like our grandparents who use to say "I can remember back when..... " I have a fun book called "Going, Going, GONE" ISBN 0-8118-0292-2 that has short essays on things we didn't notice were phased out in our lifetime. Black & white movies is on the list as well as enclosed telephone booths, nuns, penmanship and drive in movies. It's one of the reasons I love vintage film, it gives me a chance to vicariously experience the past. I'll never forget the first time I saw men's sock garters-I howled with laughter when my mother explained what they were! In old films you'll see telegrams, unanswered rotary phones, Automats, families eating in dining rooms, handkerchiefs, milkmen....all sorts of historical ghosts. BTW, I caught a Jackie Kennedy show last night on the History Channel. The entire Kennedy mistique is "history" now.

Yeah, and what REALLY irks me is comparing Michelle Obama to Jackie Kennedy. Sorry, Jackie was elegant and poised. Michelle is pretty, but has the poise of a wrestler. I was agast when speaking to an art class and mentioned Peter Max and saw blank faces. His work epitomized the 60's, and college age kids seem obscessed with the time period. Once I explained & showed examples of Max they "knew" it, but never associated the style with one guy. Sad. Try asking any random college student what 2 countries boarder the United States. Or what 3 countries make North America. You'll tear your hair out. Anyone know the Canadian show with Rick Mercer, "Talking To Americans"? It's all about that.

I'm going to get the reputation on this board of being obstinate....I seem to have opposing views to every thread & opinion. I saw Golden Boy for the first time many years ago because I had heard so much about it-William Holden in particular. I hated it. I wondered how the heck he ever became a star, it was so insulting a film. Well, I watched it again this past Sat. Only a second viewing, but what a difference. I actually enjoyed it. A LOT. First, I was struck by how much my beloved William Holden resembled the idiotic Tom Hanks with that curly dark hairpiece. Amazing and fascinating at the same time. Holden aged like a prince, while Hanks has deteriorated to well, repulsive. Holden's acting was stilted, but you could definitely see he would soon be the powerhouse he became. Plus, any time he's shirtless it's always a bonus. Sure, the "Eye-talian" charactor overacting was a bit much, especially the wife hitting and huge arm waving gestures. But ever watch Paul Muni? It was the acting style of the times coupled with the stereotype of the times. Let's compare this to insulting portrayals of black housekeepers or porters of the day. Keep it in context. I liked the Adolph Menjou/Barbara Stanwyk story line, also very typical of the day. In fact, I'd say Stanwyk's performance saves the film (as usual) She plays her typical "bad girl is only my cover for the sentimental sop underneath" as she does in Baby Face and Remember the Night. No, these movies were no GWTW, but that's why GWTW was so spectacular. Movies of those days were simple morality tales, not power blockbusters. It's fun to watch them in context of the day and imagine how teens & adults alike could enjoy the storylines & portrayals. Sure it's corn, but most classic movie lovers enjoy a little corn, don't we?

Gee, you sound like a dream boat to me! Because: 1. I love ties, especially ascots 2. I own a vintage Rudge 3. I spend inordinate time watching movies, often cancelling dates to stay home and "see that movie I haven't seen in 2 years" yet again. My philosophy is it's better to wait for a really compatible person than waste your time doing stuff that well, makes you feel like you're wasting time you _could_ be watching movies. Which is why I've spent most of my life alone. My litmus test is: A. Does he recognise 50% of my film references (Daddy, I need to go to the sh**house, I'm ascared") B. Does he see the rubber centipede on my theater seat and say, "The Tingler!" C. Willing to drive an hour to see a 35mm projection of something broadcast on TCM the same week. Sir, we have a winner!

> {quote:title=HollywoodGolightly wrote:}{quote} > Yup, you're definitely bringing her up right. Thanks for your reinforcement on that. > Have you ever had a chance to take her to The Tingler ? Heck *I* haven't even seen The Tingler in 35mm, only on TV. I'm hoping the Capitol will continue with their stellar October horror programs. Last year I saw double feature Cat People & Curse of the Cat People there. Upstate NY: Brutal winters made tolerable by outstanding classic film projected in theaters.

I watched it too, and have seen it several times before, but _I_ still like it. Yeah, I agree each sister should have different hair styles, but then how could the people in the movie be fooled? And Bette changed her voice & manner for each charactor, just subtly instead of broadly, like real twins are. The effects were top notch. I agree also that Dane Clark's charactor was great and he was completely forgotten in the end. It would have been so much more fitting if Katie left Glenn Ford high & dry for being such an arse and discovered and was moved by Dane's true love for her. Glenn Ford never looked handsomer, imho. It was good to see Dane Clark in a role bigger than a bit part. Also Charlie Ruggles was fun to see in a drama, rather than a comedy. And Bette Davis squared? A powerhouse cast elevates a silly story and is just fun enjoyment for me. BTW, I've seen the same oval Bernard prints in this movie, Mr Skeffington & Dark Victory!! Small prop department.

I'm sure I've seen those at one time or another, HWGL. I've been trying to buy a DVR so I can record the "Underground" for future enjoyment. Like I stated in another Castle thread, I'm bringing my 11 year old up right. Oct 24th we're driving an hour to see a 35mm print of House on Haunted Hill complete with Emergo in a glorious old vaudeville theater, the Capitol in Rome NY. (she keeps asking what Emergo is & I plead ignorance) Last month we drove 2 hours in the other direction to see 35mm House of Wax in 3D at the Eastman in Rochester & she loved it way better than any 3D new kids movie. She's gonna know the delights of Vincent Price and 35mm film before boys creep into her life, my mission.

> {quote:title=Deb23 wrote:}{quote} > Also enjoy Nightmare at 20,000 Feet - William Shatner gives such a good performance in this one! What about the episode with Bill Shatner when he & his wife are in the caf? and he becomes obsessed with the fortune telling napkin holder? Only Shatner could bring tension and drama to such ridiculous story lines. Although he is so often mocked, *I* think he is an engaging dramatic actor and have always enjoyed his performances. (you should see him do Shakespere-brought tears to my eyes!) And really, for the most part TZ employed really great _dramatic_ talent during the time when cool "less is more" was the popular trend in acting. This, coupled with excellent creative writing is why the series was as great as it was and still endures. It didn't hurt that they had an entire movie studio & talented staff for their production.

I'm a fence sitter, as I agree with both previous posts. Esther is important as part of the whole MGM story, helping to keep musicals in the MGM buffet in the late 40's/early 50's transitional time period. I also would like to hear from her, there's so few left from the "golden years". I bet she has a million stories. I enjoy the films occassionally on TV, especially if I catch a big water number, but the DVDs are a bit much for my tastes. But some people probably love them, so I'm glad they're available.

Oh I almost forgot another favorite classic episode. Don't recall the title, but you'll know it when I say, "Marcia....Marcia..." That episode with the girl trapped in a department store and hearing her name spoken over & over. Turns out she's a mannequin allowed to "be alive" for 24 hours and the other mannequins are calling her back. I used to be a window dresser in a department store back when stores HAD window displays. Every morning when I'd turn the lights on in the mannequin room I'd say, "Good morning Marcia....ready for another day at work?" When the store went out of business, I bought a few "Marcias" to keep in the attic. I even have one peering out the window up there. Mannequins have a way of creeping people out. Rod Serling certainly had the imagination!

Every year I say I'm going to be an "Eye of The Beholder" face for Halloween but wait too long to fabricate it. I just love those pig faces. I also quite like The Masks episode. Rod Serling (NOT STerling) was from my area and I've visit his birthplace and grave regularly. He grew up close by Recreation Park in Binghamton and "Walking Distance" episode accurately depicts his hometown, even down to the Herschell carousel. There is a plaque in the bandstand commemorating this. When I restored that carousel I looked at every horse closely for a "RS" carved in it, but he must have been too nice a kid. He lived a rather short but fruitful life and left us some fabulous writing, The Twilight Zone will always be his masterpiece.

I'm a big reader and Hollywood is my favorite subject. I'm rather tired of biographies, although a few are permanant residents in my library: "Get Happy" (Garland) by Gerald Clarke, "Tracy & Hepburn" by Kanin, "Herself" by Elsa Lanchester, "Nobody's Perfect" (Billy Wilder) by Chandler. I love general Hollywood books such as "Hollywood" by Kanin, "The Bad & The Beautiful" (films of the 50's) by Kashner, and "Star Struck" by Fowles. A great place to find out of print titles is ABEbooks.com. You can choose whether to buy a pristine copy or beat up copy depending on your budget. I absolutely LOVED Leonard Maltin's Movie Crazy book that came out last year. It was a compilation of his best articles on obscure Hollywood stories taken from his magazine of the same name. A fantasic book for any real classic film fan. And I absolutely HATE the Adrian book that came out last year. It's got some interesting pictures, but the text is all over the place. It seems written by a 12 year old; a lot of opinion by the author and not enough real facts. Plus the focus and time line jump around, making it a confusing and unsatisfying read. Boo!!

Anyone who really has a horse or even grew up around them, horse movies are always a huge disappointment. They usually depict a horse acting like a big dog, which only works well in a comedy. And the switching of horses for different scenes is legendary comedy fodder among equestrians. "It's a black horse, no a brown horse! It's a gelding, now...a mare!" My pick of horse movies: *The Black Stallion* -beautifully photographed and somewhat realistic, but the fantasy is cool too. *The Horse Whisperer* -nice sentiments & realistic training techniques. The early scene with the girls riding in snow captures the joy of riding perfectly. The only blunder is no NYC Mom would trailer a horse across the country with an SUV. She'd HIRE haulers, duh. *Lonely Are The Brave* - I taught my horse to throw her blanket off like Whiskey. And I'll call her Whiskey when she's acting a little sassy. *Son of Paleface* -best comedy talent by a horse...laying in bed pulling a blanket over himself! Wow! *Seabiscuit* - Gary Ross version. Pretty realistic, especially enjoy the shots overhead the track of galloping horses, exciting!

I just finished re-reading The Making of The Wizard of Oz by Harmetz and recall mention of Disney's encouragement. I suppose there really wasn't competition, since Disney didn't have the rights to the story and was busy working on his own projects. The idea that "fantasy" films didn't do well at the box office might have taken pressure off. It was an MGM "prestige" picture, not really made for money reasons but more to show what their talented staff could do. Thank God Louie Mayer felt that way & ran his studio according to his philosophy. We ALL benefit! And I'm also gladdened to hear of another great theater/audience experience. I keep telling people movies are a "wholly different experience" with an audience shown on a big screen. Well, at least classic or vintage ones are....new movies are just as flat on the big screen as viewed in a theater. Meh.

As a kid, no movie on Sat morning scared me as much as 13 Ghosts. I waited until my 30's to see it again (with my eyes open and sound on) and have been a Castle fan ever since. I'm trying to bring a 12 year old up right and we have a date Oct 24th at the Capitol Theater in Rome NY to see House on Haunted Hill in 35mm. "Shown in Amazing New Wonder Emergo-the thrills fly right into the audience! *The faint of heart urged not to attend this horrifically intense program!!*" All for $3.50 adults, $1.50 children. The Capitol is a grand hulking vaudville theater, and a great place to see creepy horror films. Totally worth the hour drive each way.

> {quote:title=MoeRanda10 wrote:}{quote} > Am i the only youngster here? Maybe chronologically, but not mentally. This board is full of 13 year old minds. And what 13 year old says "youngster"? Are you Quinn Cummings? I salute you. I too started my love of film around 13, skipping school to catch "Senior Silents" at the Eastman House. I now work in theaters where I can see anything I want free but just don't bother. "Junk" is right. I notice whenever I leave a theater after seeing a new film, I'm unsatisfied, like there was something missing. (possibly a STORY?) But when I leave the theater after seeing a vintage lowly B film I've got a big smile on my face. There's something about seeing the past and the "pureness" of people's emotions back then that we can identify with. People today are just trying too hard to be "cool" and there's nothing there for us to connect to. Even later stars like Steve McQueen, (the epitome of cool) you always felt he was holding back his emotions. Nowadays, there IS no underlying emotion. They just can't act. There IS no story. And all the music is just recycled hits to sell CDs. The art of storytelling is in the toilet.

> {quote:title=JackFavell wrote:}{quote} > Lately, Evelyn Keyes acting bothers me. Her sing song voice and very proper pro-nun-ci-a-tion undercuts the great romantic scenes in Here Comes Mr. Jordan for me. I used to be somewhat disturbed by her too. Until I saw Julie Christie's performance of the same charactor in Heaven Can Wait Julie Christie is definitely the weak point in that film-she's like a cardboard cutout of a dandelion; zero expression, poofy hair. >James Gleason (I cry whenever he comes on the screen in HCMJ, because I love him so much) What *IS* it about James Gleason? I love him dearly too. And that part really allows him to shine. HCMJ & The Clock, he's just so loveable. >And Robert Montgomery is just great. I am never aware of his acting in a film, whereas, with Muni, I am always somewhat aware of his technique. I never thought of that, but you're 100% dead on with that observation. But Claude Rains playing an angel/devil. He's just brilliant, convincing and entertaining and really the highlight & glue of both films. Rain's performance in HCMJ is almost the same charactor as Dr Jaquith in Now Voyager. It's as if you can read his thoughts just looking at his face. The only other actor I know with the same kind of power is Fredric March.

I watched a little and decided to do something else....but listened to it. The music was awful...sometimes sounding like a comedy (xylophone) and other times like a 50's western. The dialogue wasn't convincing either. You simply can't beat Fredric March & Charles Laughton in a film together.

> {quote:title=hlywdkjk wrote:}{quote} > But here's a vote to night of Ralph Bakshi - preferably a Friday night - with films like *American Pop* and *Wizards* early in the evening and *Heavy Traffic* and *Fritz The Cat* shown during "TCM Underground". I've never seen a Bakshi film but know they were quite notorious during the early 70s. I am right with you on that Kyle. TCM recently showed Carnal Knowledge and I was thrilled to finally have the chance to see it. Racy? Not really, just sexuality is the subject. I'm pretty prudish, especially when it comes to art and *I* wasn't offended. Never seen any Bakshi films either and absolutely feel his films are historically significant in the overall view of American film. How "dirty" can a cartoon be? I had the pleasure of meeting (& walking dogs) with bad boy animator John Kricfalusi creator of Ren & Stimpy. I had no idea he started out working for Bakshi, but once he said that, it all made sense.

Yay! Great title too! Glad there's someone else in this world who appreciates (actually knows who they are) Reta Shaw, Eric Blore, James Gleason. I also love Jack Carson, Thomas Mitchell.....wait. Thomas Mitchell & Ward Bond were in enough movies as supporting actors they would take up the entire month!

>skimpole wrote: >Is there any good reason why "Watership Down" isn't on? There was a Russian version of "The Snow Queen" that was made in the fifties and soon appeared in the United States with Art Linkletter doing a talk over. Does anyone know anything about this movie? Ohmigod The Snow Queen was one of my favorite movies as a child. I do not recall Art Linkletter voiceover (he was so uncool to me as a kid) but remember somehow "knowing" the film was foreign. My local station showed TSQ and Gay Purr-ee all the time, which I also loved. Never seen Watership Down, but something about it made me reticent-like I knew I was going to see bunnies suffering or being killed. Bambi is hard enough to watch for me. When I was a kid people ridiculed my love of animation (others called 'em cartoons) I was born an artist and knew the value of animation as an art form as a 10 y/o. Luckily, in the 80's/90's a new appreciation for animation was brought into the mainstream, much thanks to Leonard Maltin for legitimizing. I often discuss this with friends of mine who are my age and professional animators. Message was edited by: TikiSoo because of fuzzy quoting

> {quote:title=audreyforever wrote:}{quote} > every time I watch a movie, I highlight the title in the book. Geez, you two....if you can't remember a movie, you should just watch it again!! audryforever....HolywoodGoLightly....you two should go out for drinks!

> {quote:title=HollywoodGolightly wrote:}{quote} > I've been meaning to hold a long Kubrick festival to brush up on all of his movies Invite your friends! Many moons ago I took a Kubrick course in college. We saw a film per week and had 2 hour "discussions" afterwards. It was enlightening on many levels. Amazing so many varied opinions of the same film. Usually one person would pick out a detail, but once brought to your attention, everyone nodded they had seen it too. Then we'd discuss what contribution it made to the story. Seems like Kubrick was the master of sublimation. I always feel like a true participant in his films, not just a passive viewer.

> {quote:title=classic50 wrote:}{quote} > David had a problem with Peter Seller's performance in Lolita. Who's David? The hosts last night were ROBERT Osborne & ALEC Baldwin. I used to really like this movie, but last few times it's aired, I've walked away half way through. Interesting how Kubrick's films can effect you....sometimes the film strikes me as sad, other times funny and other times boring.

Thanks for that story! Shows the guy has a great sense of humor as well as the prominance of testoterone. What films would you recommend to anyone just discovering him? Also thanks about the recommendation of Ned Wynn's book. I'm pretty tired of the "star biography" and enjoy delving into more general Hollywood history.