clore

I wasn't even going to venture a guess on the UA titles as that part of the deal is confusing. A lot of UA titles seem to have kicked back to the original producers and I can never keep it straight as to what part of the UA library is in Time-Warner's hands now. FORT MASSACRE is a decent little film. I saw it about a decade after it came out, but on a big screen at my local third-run house. TROOPER HOOK is his last with Barbara Stanwyck - a McCrea month should show all of their pairings on the same day. This is a very good western that gets into the subject matter of THE SEARCHERS and TWO RODE TOGETHER but on a much smaller budget. Very nice cinematography as I recall and their are some other familiar faces in the cast. SHOOT FIRST is one that I've always wanted to see since it's his last non-western.

I know that all you silent film buffs are going to give me a really hard time with this, however, I for one do not see the wonder in presenting 24 hours of silent films. Don't you get it? The "wonder" is that they ARE showing silent films. You can get "talkies" on any other channel. If TCM wants to showcase an actor or actress why can't they do so without monopolizing the entire 24 hour block? I'm just curious - why did it take you 15 days into the Summer Under the Stars festival to make a complaint about the format? All of the previous stars featured this month had the 24 hour block dedicated to their output, but it's only when it features a silent star that you're questioning the format. Another question - do you mind subtitled films, or will Jean Gabin day have you raising the same question? By the way, silent films are not a genre.

There are also a bunch of Allied Artists films that TCM has aired already, but not within the last year. McCrea did them as a favor to Walter Mirisch. These would include *Wichita* *The First Texan* *The Oklahoman* *The Tall Stranger* (we need a letterboxed print of this TCM)

Many well known classic films have been so popularized that its common knowledge about the plot or the ending. That may well be, but in the OP I brought up a movie that is hardly ever screened. In fact, it is the only MGM film of either Tracy or Stewart that I've never seen. I suppose that some would say the the author of the TCM article is doing readers a favor giving away the surprise ending since most people aren't likely to see it, but I wouldn't be one of them. The film is question was built around the surprise, but the author makes it seem as if the surprise was the plot mechanism. Its a little different for the later generations after the film has become a classic. The film never quite has the impact that it did when it first came out. Knowing the ending could be one of the reasons that the film loses some impact. Maybe every film should end the way that WITNESS FOR THE PROSECUTION does and have someone come on and plead that viewers not reveal the twist. While I can still enjoy the film after many viewings, the first time was quite the shocker for my family and I as we didn't see it coming. Now, if someone goes and tells me that in TITANIC the boat sinks, it isn't going to ruin the story. But in a case such as this, the author and/or whoever is in charge of such submissions at TCM, could have moved the third paragraph (of seven total) down to the bottom of the page and warned that it contains a spoiler. The whole seven paragraphs contain only two sentences about the plot and the twist was revealed in the second one.

I thought that the second JAWS film was a bit of a **** also. Better than the ones that followed, but that's not exactly a compliment.

I remember that particular Peanuts' strip very well. It got me so mad that I wrote a letter to the editor about it. I got my revenge by avoiding anything related to the comic strip after that. I never bought any "Peanuts" merchandise for either of my two children or my four grandchildren. But I did also send a letter to the paper and I wasn't the only one. By midweek in the paper's letter section, it was apparent that many weren't pleased and there was an apology from the editior. I thought that it was Charles Schulz who owed everyone an apology. By the way, I made a slight error in my OP. Lucy spoiled the film for Linus, not Charlie Brown. Here is a black-and-white repro of the strip in question: (spoilers ahead) http://blogs.suntimes.com/scanners/2010/02/spoilers_linus_lucy_charles_m.html

If anyone has recorded THE MURDER MAN and has yet to watch it, do not read the TCM article on the film. It distorts the POV of the film and also in doing that, gives away the ending. And lemme tell ya, this film does have a great finale. Since it is so rarely screened, there's not a soul with whom I am familiar that has said a thing about this film, so the thing was a delight from start to finish. It reminds me of a time when I was going to introduce my ex to CITIZEN KANE. This was a Sunday night airing and it was spoiled for her by a "Peanuts" Sunday comic strip that had Lucy ruin Charlie Brown's first viewing of the film by defining "Rosebud" to him.

BTW: Only one of the two posters is showing up. Unless you didn't actually want to tell us which movie poster you didn't like. That's weird, it was there in preview mode last night. Anyway, the problem is fixed in the OP. Saul Bass did get mad at Spike Lee, he didn't consider the CLOCKERS poster to be "homage" at all - more like outright theft.

Jeez Ben, they pay you, can you at least watch this stuff? Why does the host have to be familiar with the film? Isn't he counting on the researchers to do THEIR work properly? Obviously THE WOLF MAN is one that no one is familiar with because when it last aired and was introduced by Robert Osborne, they had him say that Claude Rains plays a scientist "who is up to no good." The staff's job is to make the host look as if he knows what he is discussing. Since the format of TCM is to give us the impression that the host is watching with us, maybe the whole process needs to be discused. As it is now, the staff is making the hosts look ridiculous. Not always, but enough that some changes have to be considered.

Here's one that I didn't like: (scroll down for the reason why) That was because it reminded me too much of this one:

Seriously, it would be nice if there were never any errors in such details, but it's a very small thing. OK, the researchers had him say 1952 instead of 1951. Just a small error. Suppose they had him say that it starred John Wayne instead of James Stewart? Another minor detail, right? After all, John Wayne was in a 1954 film about a plane that they feared would crash, that's not too far off. Suppose in addition to those two small errors, imagine the researchers had him say that the film was directed by Morton DaCosta instead of Henry Koster. It's sounds enough alike and it's just one more small error. It's not as if we listen to these intros expecting them to be accurate or provide useful info, is it? I mean, we can always look up this stuff if we really wanted to know about it.

Musso and Frank's maybe? Franks and Beans? Knockwurst and beans, Johnny Carson's favorite?

Are you sure that it's not Manischewitz that you don't like?

I was trying to be subtle, let's just say that Elisha was cookin'.

Thank you. There's another one of whom I keep forgetting to watch for as she's supposedly one of the orphanage people. The trouble is that the sequence is so spectacular that my attention isn't on the people. Anyway, supposedly Grandma Walton, Ellen Corby is one of the staffers.

Don't forget his gig as a drummer in *The Phantom Lady*. This is a guy who really gets off on his playing!

Eddie G. and Joan Blondell must have had a few laughs over the failure to recreate 30's fashions and hairstyles. I have also wondered what the purpose of setting it in another period was as far as the story goes. It really just inflated the budget for props as far as I'm concerned.

I remember watching LASSIE with Tommy Rettig on TV. His mom would go to the wall phone and crank the handle and say "Hello, Jenny..." I've only seen that kind of phone in exhibits, but I do recall my grandmother's table phone. It was one of those with a receiver that seemed to weigh ten pounds and the dial was metal, not plastic. I believe that she was on a party line as a few times when I answered, I heard other people talking. Goodness, I can't have been more than five years old, perhaps younger.

Aww, thank you Audrey. She's sleeping a lot these days and made mention that she was never so tired so often. My sister said "Mom, you've never been 92 before either, you have to expect to slow down somewhat."

Was it STAGE DOOR that I saw recently and she was wearing what looked like a dunce cap? But you're right, she looked like something out of Sherwood Forest. Last night watching MIGHTY JOE YOUNG, Robert Armstrong has a scene where he's driving a truck and being chased by police. To appear nonchalant, he pulls his hat brim down. It was a good thing he was only in front of a rear projection screen as otherwise he wouldn't be able to see a thing.

I forget what it was that I saw lately, perhaps SITTING PRETTY, but there was a scene of a surburban husband coming home from work and being told that they're having the Walkers (or whomever) over for dinner and that he has to change for the occasion. The guy is already in a suit and tie, and it's not the boss who is coming over, just some neighbors, so why aren't the clothes he has on already good enough? But I do get a kick out of those films where we're supposed to have a working class woman who is sharing an apartment, yet she's decked out in the splendid creations of Edith Head or some other studio designer throughout the film.

It was incredible how Arthur Treacher gained in fame as he became a senior citizen. His fish and chips was my favorite fast food and I miss our local outlet.

Budd Boetticher / Randolph Scott hooked up Anthony Mann / James Stewart hooked up Martin and Lewis split up Frank Sinatra shot up The Amazing Colossal Man really shot up Dean Stockwell grew up Cinemascope stretched out 3D reached out Jayne Mansfield stuck out

Very good sir, that made me laugh.

Charles Lane was Homer Bedloe on PETTICOAT JUNCTION. The truck driver was John Ford regular Jack Pennick. William Schallert, who was also on DOBIE GILLIS as well as THE PATTY DUKE SHOW is a gas station attendent. Supposedly Richard Farnsworth of THE GREY FOX is one of the cowboys in the beginning.