Tikisoo
-
Posts
9,238 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Posts posted by Tikisoo
-
-
Must be the "recycled" music thing again. I mentioned it when I noticed Now Voyager music used in Mildred Pierce.
You know you've seen a movie too many times when you start noticing the incidental back round music. ;-)
-
> Miss Goddess writes: "He was in New York recently, interviewing Jerry Lewis and I almost went to see that, more because of PB than JL, but the weather was too cold."
Geez, I'm 5 hours and $500 away from that and if I had proper notice _I_ would go...through a blizzard.
I have loved PB since I first saw him and easily overlook his flaws, because his brilliance outshines any conceit. I love him as a filmmaker and as a writer and chronicler of old Hollywood. Being cute doesn't hurt.
I'm very excited hearing about Sacred Monsters and second the idea of it being filmed. For those of us financially and temperature challenged.
-
Hey THANKS TCM forums for giving me the heads up on this. I watched last night not expecting much, (didn't someone say it was second rate?) and being bowled over. Yes, MM looked great! I liked how the Falls sound and power was almost another character. For those of you who have never been there, it was a pretty good representation.
That overhead shot of dead MM on the floor with the lines of shadow was iconic.
And I was excited to see a carrillion, (even if it was only a model) close up it looked real to me. I love visiting carrillions all over the US and seeing one in a movie was thrilling!
Funny, RO opening he says MM later starred in How To Marry A Millionaire, and her co-star Jean Peters really did!
-
>OdessaSteps88 wrote:
> Here's the question:
> What 1948 film includes a dream sequence in which there is an umbrella with a hole in it?
Just saw The Dark Past with William Holden as guessed earlier.
It was shown directly after Blind Alley, which it is a word for word remake. In fact, the dream sequence looks like it was the exact same footage.
My question: How many word for word remakes have been done?
(I can only think of this example & Psycho, but I'm sure there's many more & YOU know them!)
-
I watched Dinner At Eight last night and when the doors closed realized We never get to SEE that dinner. I then started wondering about movies that you never see the title "character". I bet there's more...how many can you think of?
Rosemary's Baby
-
Omigod thanks for posting that photo! Talk about reaching into the dark recesses of my mind! I remember those! Scared the crappola out of me when I was a kid....but like most scary things, I couldn't look away.
I sure would like to know more about them.
-
Still can't find Paper Moon soundtrack, wah. The LP is hard enough to find, but I believe the Depression era compilation was never released on CD. I once saw a Korean pressed version on ebay, but bidding skyrocketed higher than I could afford.
Too bad because it contains my favorite Depression songs.
I have some Rhino/TCM CDs....did they discontinue their affiliation?
-
> Film_Fatale wrote
> Well, I can't imagine anyone who'd be able to resist that smile! B-)
That's speaking from a woman's pov. When watching the "extras" on my Stalag 17 DVD I almost fell out of my chair when I saw Bill in a tuxedo at the premiere. Just a gorgeous hunk of man. Even if wearing mechanic overalls. Even a potato sack.
But what's amazing is that men love him too. Men love macho guys like McQueen and Mitchum, but Bill Holden played sensitive and cerebral types too. I don't know ONE person who dislikes Holden as an actor.
I actually skipped my 6pm class the other day to camp out by the TV to watch double feature Blind Alley and Dark Past. Same exact scripts but the gangster part was played by Chester Morris in the first and Bill Holden in the second.
Morris was more menacing, but **** and a bit overacting by todays standards. Holden was still scary and menacing, but in a more controlled way. Both films "worked" for me, but it was fun seeing just how unique Holden's acting is. He was just a tad bit too handsome for me to believe.
I'll have to give Picnic another try too. At first I hated that role for him, he seemed too old for it. But I admire him for taking roles that "stretched" him.
And who can forget when he played himself on I Love Lucy and put his chin on the seat back and stared at her eating lunch?
-
> WhyaDuck wrote:
> Charlie Chaplin liked Lemmon and Walter and liked them giving him his Oscar, enough said.
Always he sucks the audience into the movie and you believe he is the character.
> Even up to Grumpy that has him selling his piano because of forecloser, YES FORECLOSER, as in national forecloser. Lemmon could take something and make it more by doing less.
> If what I'm saying makes no sense, please check out Fortune Cookie, or The Apartment or any of his movies. What he makes look easy, I have to wonder why not that many other actors have done as well.......
> Little known thing...The Ernie Kovacs monkee music bit....Ernie in the middle, Eddie Adams as another monkee and that monkee at the piano, Jack Lemmon, perfect comdey timing.
What you're saying makes no sense, as if English is your second language, which it very well might be, I apologise. When typing, readers cannot hear your spoken inflections and it can be confusing.
Who is this "Walter" you speak of in the first quote? You need to refer to both first & last names so we know.
In second quote, who is "Grumpy"? And I believe it's spelled "forclosure", but typos and spelling are easier for readers to decipher.
In your third quote you say, "What he makes look easy"....huh? What are you saying?
And then you start talking about Ernie Kovacs and the Monkees. I don't think Kovacs ever worked with the Monkees. Or are you referring to "monkeys"?
Sorry to be so contentious, but your post was really confusing.
In an earlier thread about Jack Lemmon, I added that I thought he might be underappreciated because his acting and comedy style were so brilliant, as a viewer you were almost unaware that he was doing so much work. I think it takes a lot of intelligence and talent to perform so well that viewers aren't aware they're watching a performance.
-
Geez, who *DOESN'T* love William Holden?
-
>lzcutter wrote:
> A similar thing happened to Alfred Hitchcock ten years later when he made *The Birds*. He wanted the film to end with Rod Taylor and company approaching San Francisco only to find the Golden Gate Bridge covered in birds.
Wow! I can just picture that in my mind, what a great ending that would have been!
-
You're repeating yourself CK.
I realize a ghost story is always better if it follows some sort of logic, but it's a GHOST story, you must allow yourself to be brought into a fantasy world to enjoy it.
> When the construction dug the pool...why didn't "They" find any coffins?
I suspect the idea here is the coffins were just under the soil of the pool hole, most likely 6 ft. The tornado brought rain that filled the pool with water, the tree uprooted loosening the soil further and the coffins floated up from the low level of soil coverage.
I know, makes no sense, but makes a scary scene!
> everyone races upstairs, opens the bedroom door & run right to the closet. ...... How did they know to go to the closet?
If you went into a room where a child was last seen and saw a pile of furniture rammed against a wall from a passing tornado, I bet you'd look under that pile too. Especially if there was a closet on that wall. You'd hope the child was protected by the closet structural enclosure.
I don't believe in ghosts either, but I love the antropological needs for the cultural "ghost story". They almost always boil down to some morality lesson and Poltergeist is a perfect modern example. (greed, they didn't move the graves) This is why they need to hold some logic and a lot of human emotion to make them effective. Look at A Christmas Carol.
-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1105342/Horse-star-film-attraction-bursting-cinema.html
"The horse noticed the cinema and headed towards us, and when it got close, the automatic doors opened and in it came."
This story was posted on my "horse" board, thought you might get a kick out of it. Yes, horses love popcorn!
-
> joefilmone wrote:
> I do not understand why people can not turn off their cell phones for two hours!!
Yeah, well I don't understand why people can't chew popcorn with their mouth closed.
Most likely the reason why the volume is so loud in theaters these days. I bring light foam earplugs.
-
Whoa, that's a lot of questions.
First off, looking at the ages of the actors, you must just go with it. Actors play a range of ages, don't pinpoint them to such a narrow number. I think the daughter, Dana was supposed to be younger, more like 14-15.
I think the "jist" of the story is the hauntings catalyst was Carol Anne. A poltergeist is supposedly a spirit that latches on to one person and channels through him/her. It's usually a child, older or mentally disabled person because they're not strong enough to "fight" off the spirit.
The spirits were dormant until Carol Ann moved in.
I think all the debris blocking the closet was because objects were "sucked in" by the evil energy. The beds were just too big to fit, so they blocked it.
I think the reason why Carol Ann's voice came through the TV, it's because TV is an electric transmitter. It was picking up her voice and projecting it. She was in another energy plane.
Super silly movie, but effective if you can allow yourself to be sucked into it by disregarding logic. The simplest visual effects were better than the cgi, in my opinion. The random beams of diffused light coming from the closet was my favorite effect.
And ever see the Twilight Zone episode of the girl who gets lost in the TV? I can't seem to locate my TZ companion book to tell you the exact episode. But it's obviously the inspiration for the Poltergeist story.
-
TCM has shown this film several times in the last 6 months....I know because every time I see it on the schedule, I call my friend and urge him to watch it.
I love Chaplin but this is my single favorite film of his.
It's a good example of the power of talkies vs silents. So much was said by the words and also the voices sounds. Verdoux's genteel calm upper class voice and Raye's loud obnoxious voice......who's the one who deserves to live? Who do we feel sorry for? Who do we dislike?
I think it's his most accessible film for those interested in Chaplin.
-
Don't ask us, ask Richard Schickel.
We'd only be speculating.
-
>hamradio wrote:
> Back in the mid 1990's, there was a series called "Movie Magic"
>It looks like the cables have "Klingon cloaking tech".
I remember that show!
Love your "Klingon cloaking" reference. I'm going to call it that from now on!
Guess what I was trying to say is that "film restoration" is a wholly different thing than "digitally remastering" a film.
"Restoring" a film means fixing fading, spots, scratches or anything that has changed the film from how it was when first released.
High Definition (high contrast) is digitally remastering a film. If upping the contrast levels (or sharpening) now shows wires a little clearer in an old movie, so be it. If you "cloaked" the newly visible wires, it becomes "alteration" on top of "remastering", not unlike "colorization" of old b&w film.
You also should bear in mind that many vintage movie prints differ. Very few can still be struck from the negative, most are second or third generation prints. And what about well worn used old prints that are the only ones left in existence?
Recently, my film group screened "Remember The Night" and our print was much brighter and cleaner than what TCM showed. I believe it was from the Eastman House collection.
-
I agree with all Izcutter's comments in this thread.
I don't give a hoot what a celebrity does in his/her private life when enjoying their work, be it writers, actors, singers, directors, etc. What matters is the product.
This is why I find it so annoying when a celebrity announces they're "OUT of the closet". Who cares?
And yes, I think RO just referred to him as "Randy" just as if he was referring to Katherine Hepburn as "Kate".
-
I walked in the door to only catch the last 5-10 minutes or so. I loved the ending where the guy screams at cars on the highway, so I sat down to watch. There was an extended ending that I did not recognise (but so cool to see Richard Deacon as the Dr!)
Ben then talked about how the studio tacked on this extra ending. Wow! Funny that even though I've seen this extended ending before, I'll always remember the original ending I saw as a kid!
"There's coming for *YOU* !"
-
> {quote:title=movieman1957 wrote:}{quote}
> They are saving one of my favorites for February. "It Should Happen To You" wit hJudy Holliday is on Feb 1 at noon.
The poster for that movie hangs above my TV. I'm a big Garson Kanin and Billy Wilder fan and have read most everything either has written. They both write of Lemmon often & glowingly; what a great guy he was, how professional and talented. All things you really never see from our side of the screen.
Really great actors/comedians make it look easy, you're not even really aware of their talent.
-
Rather than argue, I'd really like to say I like this particular TCM topic. I think they come up with some pretty innovative and clever catagories.
That said, I reject advances from men with shaved heads because all I can think of is kids in school with lice. Cooties still at work.
-
Well, I'm a restorationist. The general rule of thumb is that you ONLY re-create if there's less than 50% of the original remaining. Otherwise, you just "clean".
I am quickly getting sick & tired (of getting sick & tired) of all this "hi-definition" hoopla. All it is is upping the contrast and making the blacks black. Sony TVs were always set up this way to a certain extent, but "hi-def" is to the extreme.
If altering each frames "contrast" sharpens the picture so much the wires show, you've just *altered* the picture. Film "restoration" otoh, is where you correct fading and eliminate anomolies of the print like water damage or scratches.
When I'm a rich old lady, my goal is to retire and volunteer in film preservation at the Eastman House.
-
> {quote:title=drednm wrote:}{quote}
> she makes me gag
Really? Even as an older child, like in Since You Went Away?
I for one, am sad kids these days just act coldly, with none of the cloying manipulative undertones kids really posess. Shirley's just a product of her time. And she helped people (and her studio) get through an awful dark depression.
What have you done that's so great?
Who Loves William Holden?
in Hot Topics
Posted
I made sure to watch Picnic last night because it was the only role I ever saw WH in that I didn't like. My memory is going folks, because I was surprised at the ending, as if I had never seen this film before. (or I'm mixing up two diff films)
At first I thought WH was too old for this part, and he acted kind of ****, unlike himself. This viewing, I thought yes, he played against his usual "cool" type, but did pretty well with the "stretch".
If he wasn't such a mega hunk, Rosilind Russell's character wouldn't have felt the desperation as she did. And it countered gorgeous (despite the burned mullet) Kim Novak's beauty perfectly.
He overacted quite a bit at the end, professing his love for "Madge", but I ate it up anyway. That guy can do no wrong in my book.