Erebus

I?m almost entirely a guy who just takes TCM as it offers, day by day, even hour by hour. Occasionally one of TCM?s ?tween movies ads mentions something upcoming that makes me say ?oh yes? but usually I forget about it and then have to rely on dumb luck as to whether or not I wind up watching it. I did manage to be onboard for a few SOTM, such as with Ida, Rita, and Randolph, so that I knew which nights to look forward to, just as I similarly knew to avoid the recent slate of animal star features. I have learned that Fridays and weekends offer less than the rest of the week, at least for me, which is not so bad since I like my golf and other sports. But generally I?m oblivious. I never salivate over, or even scan, the latest advance release of a monthly schedule. Nor do I search TCM online for upcoming Sheridan or Holden material. And I never program the VCR to tape should I be unavailable. Mostly I?m adrift in the TCM universe, totally subject to the moment.

imdb shows "Mr. Atoz", aka Ian Wolfe, with 273 credits, many of which are for TV. I couldn't scroll through them to count how many are for movies but the guy seems to be everywhere, always to welcome and competent effect. For example, he was the "Registrar of Births" in last night's offering of "Random Harvest".

I enjoy "Nora Prentiss", especially the first half of it. Later the plot takes some rather unlikely turns, which diminishes the experience somewhat, at least for me. However, when I first saw "Nora" a few years ago I was just getting into classic films and wasn?t very familiar with Ann Sheridan, so this film came as a real revelation regarding her and turned me into a total fan. As for "Lady in the Lake", I?ve never been able to get past the opening because I found the ?first-person camera point of view? of Marlowe to be off-putting.

Could be San Francisco. I would expect to see more development and evidence of steeper grades, but the background is blurry enough that one can't be certain just how how developed or hilly that city is. Also if it were San Francisco I would think the horizon wouldn't be that nearly horizontal, assuming that is the horizon.

Maybe it's too obvious to mention but Peter Lorre does a good twitch.

Here's a trivia question for you: what is the city captured in the background of that still of Stanwyck and Taylor from "The Night Walker"? (I ask not to quiz but because I'd like to know where the movie, which I have not seen, is set. The scene reminds me of Reno but for various reasons I'm confident it's not Reno.)

For sheer fun, William Holden and Lee Remick (with major nod to Michelle Pfeiffer just because she's as beautiful as they come). For art, oh, who knows, .... probably Claude Rains and Bette Davis.

"Just as in Britain during WWII there?s no guarantee that we?re going to win the War on Terror. However, unlike then, most of today?s filmmakers and actors, along with most journalists, feel no compunction to rally the people to the cause. They want to see Bush defeated, and if that also means defeat for America, and the consequences for the Middle East and the Western democracies that such a defeat would entail, then so be it." http://monkeytenniscentre.blogspot.com/2007/09/war-movies-then-and-now.html

I enjoyed last night?s ?The Russia House? with Sean Connery and Michelle Pfeiffer. Funny to think that we could actually have had a cold war spy movie that supplies suspense without any killing and with little interpersonal violence. We saw few firearms in the whole movie. Good film, with legitimate suspense, despite that half-wit Maltin giving it only two stars as ?never catching fire?. I admit that a little Pfeiffer goes a long way, but it's not as though she ever even wore a miniskirt, let alone walked around half-naked. Point being that perhaps with a code moviemakers might actually have had to depend upon subtlety of plot rather than succumb to the easy temptation of supplying testerone-ravaged adolescents with Schwarzenneggerian hyper-action. I'm all for artistic freedom but when you lower the bar you get low, which would be the state of Hollywood today. Message was edited by: Erebus

"schlocky" - yes. I found the first thirty minutes so stiff and brittle that I had to bail in exasperation, though I did return to catch the last third of the film. I love Crawford and the cast but it seemed too connect-the-dots to me. I prefer more substance, and only then connection.

Olivia de Havilland is so spot on in Not As a Stranger. At least the third time I've seen this film but the first time I've realized how good she is. I love her. Maybe it's the facial symmetry. Not to say that Grahame isn't hot and right in her smaller role (reminds me of Ida). This movie deserves higher profile, IMHO.

> It is sad to hear that Carrie Fisher thinks the text > of the film is too 'flag-waving' for contemporary > audiences. I have always thought that it presents > perfectly the distillation of what democracy in the > United States is intended to be. It steers clear of > poltical affiliation - something State Of The > Union couldn't do or wouldn't do - and the value > of the individual citizen in this governmental > system. (And of the citizen's obligation to being an > active, informed participant in it's own > government.) Hear hear! Completely apolitical and nonpartisan, and to the credit of Holden as the mouthpiece who clearly gets it. Yes, I'm a Holden guy, and somebody who likes Crawford but prefers him a bit less loud, all the while loving Judy Holliday.

> Sex and politics. Can't we just give it a rest and > make this TCM board a respite from all that. I would gladly give it a rest, but I will give **** for tat, as I did. And ****: > But I do have to admire how Ronnie stood on solid > ground with his economic policies, even while the > economy was going into the toilet. After Carter?s 20%+ inflation rate you would regale Reagan over the economy? Reagan was the antidote to Carteresque economic poison. (Reminding one that just as Reagan stood as cure to the Iranian hostage ?crisis?, so today one can only imagine the rogue Mideast terrorist states hoping for Dem victories in 2008. For the terrorists a Dem regime means happy days. Read and weep.)

> This wasn't the last Reagan assignment that lacked > spark, pace and humor! At least the movie didn't > last eight years! Lest you forget, some of us here consider Reagan to be, along with Teddy and Truman, among the best presidents of the 20th Century. Sometimes, even often, all we need is a guy who understands what it means to stand on solid ground. When it comes to the future, I'll take a guy who has learned just a little from the past.

> Reagan's best acting job, no question. I always like > Sheridan. She was quoted as saying she wanted to > play Randy Monahan so badly "my teeth ached". Yes, she was born to know that that was her role. Definitive Ann. Great movie, most especially because it did not feature the biggies of the day. And we're all luckier for it. It's almost an accidental classic.

Just to clarify, I'm already familiar with Fastest Gun Alive, Born Yesterday, All the King?s Men, and The Real Glory, and consider them all more than decent, especially Fastest Gun Alive. I separated them out only because they're not "off my beaten trail".

I agree. For me this is possibly the most satisfying Star day this month, due to a fortunate confluence of simple quality of material and general lack of prior familiarity on my part. Missed the overnight stuff but have awakened to watch Scandal Sheet; Down Three Dark Streets; and Big House, USA; having previously seen only the latter. (Interesting that the Crawford villain in Scandal was named ?Mark Chapman?, but perhaps that?s old hat around here.) This is the TCM I love: decent movies just a little off the beaten trail (speaking of the offerings other than Fastest Gun Alive, Born Yesterday, All the King?s Men, and The Real Glory). Scandal and Dark Streets were delightful.

> I'd vote of its being included in any list of the 100 worst films of all time... Seriously. This movie is a hoax within the history of film. An embarrassment upon the resumes of its cast, collectively. Do a little dance, dance a little do, and call it entertainment, as if an artist could possibly confess to being so obtuse. Shallow, the definition of shallow, and almost the antithesis of "essential", calling into question the dignity of any who would acclaim it as such. Cheap, in lieu of more graphic ascription.

Thanks for the heads up altfg. I ordered "Killer Tomatoes" today, just so I can read the chapter on Ann. Fitting that she's on the cover. She was a sweetie. I cried the day I discovered her, over the realization that decades had gone by without my having even known she'd existed.

I see now Ken. Sorry. I shouldn't have mentioned politics in the first place, but then perhaps not too much harm has been done.

> Newer movies are a different matter, however, > almost entirely due to unfortunate recent trends of > celebrities speaking out ignorantly on political > matters. > > I would be inclined to agree, except that deep down I > kinda feel that celebrities should have as much right > as the rest of all Americans to speak out ignorantly > on political issues "What are you a follower of the Constitution ?" Would that be the same Constitution that permits me to privately shun them for what they say and do while utilizing their own Constitutional rights? I'm engaging in expression of personal preferences, not censorship.

"did anyone else think there was a strong implication that she had been involved with the Laird of Killoran " Didn't see it that way at the time but looking back I think that could have been the intent. She certainly did seem to have insight into his best interest. I'm going to keep my eye out for movies involving Pamela Brown.

"I don't believe I would be watching as much. For example, if Leo Gorcey and Tony Randall each had a day, then that would be two full days I wouldn't be watching TCM." I'm like that too, and really wish I weren't because it keeps me from a lot of what could otherwise be enjoyable movies. For example, right now TCM is running Abbott & Costello and since I can't get into any of that, I'm watching golf instead. Fortunately with the older movies for me it's more a matter of genre rejection than star rejection. Newer movies are a different matter, however, almost entirely due to unfortunate recent trends of celebrities speaking out ignorantly on political matters.

I was very impressed with Pamela Brown as "Catriona", for the performance but even more with the woman evident within the actress. Such a strong and confident person. Seems like she would have been an interesting person to call a friend.

Yes, quite enjoyable, made more so by the window provided onto a culture and a geography I don't often get to see so fully.