clore

No, just a goof thread based on something I read about 45 years ago. That was an article on all of the things that supposedly made 40s films better than 60s films. This was just the reverse, I was having some fun with things that make me chuckle when I watch films from that decade, but I was trying to do it from the perspective of someone who hadn't seen too many of them, or at least saw enough to make these observations. The part about Alan Hale, Ward Bond and Barton Maclane is actually something that my mother said a long time ago when she walked in on me while I was watching THE MALTESE FALCON and she saw Bond and Maclane. It was something she thought of initially when she was seeing films of that decade when they were new. She loved Ward Bond though, used to watch WAGON TRAIN every week. Mom will be 92 next Thursday, so Mom, this is for you!

Yes, Eric Blore and also Edgar Norton although he was more prolific in the 30s.

I admit that this guy has rubbed me the wrong way with his continued false proclamations and if the powers that be decide to delete the thread, I'm not going to blame them. I do hope though that he uses the link that I provided below to see that this was a "feud" that was dragged in here from another thread and which was based on an answer I had provided twice already in that thread. But I have already taken a step that I've never taken here on the TCM boards - I've put the guy on ignore. He still has his right to post anything that he wants and I'll be exercising my rights in not having to read it. But I thank you for your compliments and welcome your level-headedness.

You must have every one of my 100 posts memorized. Not that I want to, I just happen to have an excellent memory for things that I've read. It's better to remember things than to make them up. In a sane world your 2000 posts is mass destruction of this board. What would you know about a sane world? 2,285 posts over a 56 month period - that's 44 a month for me. You have 105 posts in a six week period, that's equivalent to about 70 per month.

I can only remember seeing one William S. Hart movie and that was HELL'S HINGES which was part of a special "Treasures from the American Film Archives" presentation at least five years ago.

Dont get in a dither when you hear that zither Not like you get when you see someone kissing on screen.

I would not even count the Bowery Boys as movies. Who cares what you would count as movies? They WERE released as feature films whether you like it or not. Failed! Just what I said about WB treating subscribers like turds.... That's probably just you being treated that way and the reason is obvious. dum da dum da dum.....dum da dum da dum.. The right theme for you with that emphasis on dum dum. And you're still avoiding the question of what is a "guhead?"

you ducked the item about allied artists. what aa movies have been on tcm? You really don't know how to read, do you? I've responded to that twice in that other thread already. Are you really that dumb or just acting? http://forums.tcm.com/thread.jspa?threadID=161132&tstart=0 In the meantime, what do you have to say about your idiotic statements that TCM never airs UA or Republic titles? Let me guess - zero, zilch, nada Maybe you should check the schedules before you open your big mouth. You made the accusation about them not being aired, actually the burden of proof is upon the accuser. By the way, you ducked the question in your 30's thread - what is a "guhead?"

I read somewhere that toward the end, Sanders was quite frustrated over Conway's refusal to give up drinking. Not long after that, Conway was found in a Skid Row flop house. He ended up dying of cirrhosis.

Thank you very much. I wanted to pick someone other than Arthur Treacher so I just took the name of the last butler that I've seen. Treacher was almost too obvious. I had someone in mind originally for a perennial cab driver, then it slipped my mind. It wasn't Frank Faylen or Tom D'Andrea, but for some reason I had a senior moment and forgot who first came to mind.

If mr. **** retentive wants to worry about spelling guhead wallow in it. You don't read too well either. I said earlier that no one said anything about your spelling. Why are you so anally retentive on bad spelling? What's a "guhead?" Actually, I love your false proclamations and your inability to face up to being corrected. Now, what was that you said about TCM not airing UA, AA or Republic films and linking that to a conspiracy? Do you sit in a tinfoil hat while posting? Maybe it affects your TV reception.

People drive funny - they sit there and shake the steering wheel, even if they are on a straight road. Men never go to the bathroom. We all know when women say they are going to powder their nose what they are really going to do, but with all of the drinking going on in 40s films, no man uses a bathroom. Unless he's using the window to escape from the cops. Ward Bond, Barton Maclane and Alan Hale are in everything. You can't escape them. Were there a lot of people that looked like those guys, is this why they are mandatory for so many 40s movies? My grandfather says that Ward Bond was in so many movies that if he used the men's room at the theater, Ward Bond was in there too. Lazy people can't dial. They pick up a phone and say "Get me Bigelow 6 - 4999." Just once i'd like to hear someone say "get it yourself." George Sanders can't decide which side he is on. He's fighting the Nazis in one movie and then is a Nazi in the next one. Then he's the Falcon and gets killed by a Nazi and his brother Tom Conway has to take his place. Speaking of Tom Conway, how is it that he's Dr. Louis Judd in one movie and gets clawed to death, then he comes back a year later as the same character in *The Seventh Victim* helping a woman find her missing sister? Were singing cowboys forgetful? Roy Rogers always played Roy Rogers, Gene Autry was always Gene Autry. That's not so bad, but in one movie they are living in an era with cars and telephones, then in the next movie they're in the old west. How did they know what year it was when they woke up? Does every newsboy and bellboy have to look like Billy Benedict and every butler like Halliwell Hobbes?

I'm wondering if you can point out some other films where the filters were as important to the look of the film as lighting and film stock. Those annoying filters used in SOUTH PACIFIC.

He's dismissed a great many films that we all love and is probably sitting in his mom's basement just laughing his...head off. He's listed quite a number of films with the comment that he's not interested in them. That could be interpreted two ways - either he's seen them and isn't interested in seeing them again or he hasn't seen them and isn't interested. He appears to be deliberately vague. But given his posting history of outrageously false pronouncements and that he has a habit of not returning once proved wrong, I can't state that I'm at all interested in what he has to say whether he's being vague or declarative. I believe he's just banging on the keyboard to make a lot of noise. While he pleaded "Give me credit. I, at least, have an opinion," I can't help but be reminded what Clint Eastwood had to say about opinions in THE ENFORCER. After seeing his "superjew" comment in the thread on Leonard Maltin, it's very difficult to give him any credit for any opinion.

You know you've won your argument when an **** retentive nitpicks your spelling. I didn't see anyone pick on your spelling, just your punctuation and sentence structure which, in turn, renders your thoughts indecipherable.

Not at all. Of course there will be films that don't stand up to the passage of time, but can one really dismiss a whole decade? I mean if a person can find even two-dozen that they can appreciate this many years later, it would seem that the phrase might better be "Why I don't like most 30s movies." He may find many more that he does like, so might you. Personally, a well made story from any era will attract my attention and in my time here, I've complained about a lot of things but not about recent titles slipping onto the schedule for any reason. As with any scheduled item, if I don't like it, I don't have to watch it. I mostly appreciate seeing 30s and 40s films because a lot of them have been out of circulation for years and I like seeing ones that I've read about and have never had the chance to see. These films all pre-date me as i was born in 1951. Now I'm feeling that about a lot of 50s films which haven't been seen in ages if at all. The Universal titles alone could program TCM for months.

There is a . period & then a new sentence. Are you that dumb or just acting? Well, your posts can leave one dumbstruck. But your new sentence just threw out a bunch of additional titles and ended with a period. That's hardly proper sentence structure. It also threw in "Ecstasy" and "Enthusiasm which are not British or American films, so your intent was hardly clear. In fact, it wasn't clear to the degree of zero, zilch, nada. I like a few British pix of the 30's : Things to Come, Man Who Knew Too Much, 39 Steps, Jamaica Inn, Secret Agent, Sabotage, Lady Vanishes, Rome Express, The Ghoul , The Man Who Changed His Mind, Non-Stop New York, King Solomon's Mines, FP1 Doesnt Answer, Phantom Ship, Young & Innocent. The Black Cat, Of Human Bondage, A Star is Born. Vampyr, Enthusiasm, Ecstasy, The Most Dangerous Game. For what I could see, it's up there with your previous gibberish complaining that TCM never airs UA, Republic or AA films and that there were no (zero, zilch, nada) women directors in the studio era. Speaking of punctuation, why not fix this sentence? Mask of Fu Manchu I might like its one of Karloff's worst.

*The Black Cat, Of Human Bondage, A Star is Born* and *The Most Dangerous Game* are not British films.

Why stop at 1939? The code was in effect for another 25 years more or less.

It was shot like a 1929 film. Frame two actors talking to each other, no cross-cutting, no close-ups, just hold the camera there for five minutes. Then move on to the next scene and repeat the same approach. I understand that Hawks turned it into a comedy, This could have used some humor, although Miles Malleson did give it a lift here and there. Everyone seemed to be talking at the same pace and the same volume regardless of the dialogue. Ennui set in and by the time we got near the end and some surprises popped up, it was too late.

*Three on a Match* has too great a cast for me to miss. I've seen it a few times already, but I can't get tired of it. Can't wait for *Blind Alley* also. This day has been the best so far this month as I'm big on movies from the 30s.

I think that 800 films is a bit of a stretch. The IMDb shows him with 129 - including shorts. But he does deserve a tribute.

I sure hope that they nail you because of this part of the rules and regulations: *Any excessive posting, including without limitation, posting the same thing multiple times (in the same or different thread or forum) or posting content or comments that have no relevance to what is being discussed by others, is prohibited.* BTW - if they didn't worry about the after-effect of showing THE DAM BUSTERS which had a dog named n-word, I think it disproves your theory.

Another thing is the policy to not allow new posts to threads over a year old. This strikes most of us as kind of weird, since most forums are the opposite, preferring that old threads be used, rather than creating new ones on the same topic. I'll support you on that one. Over on the Classic Horror Film Board, there's a self-appointed traffic cop who manages to flag every thread that is "in violation" of the rules to search for an existing thread on the same subject. An pro-author on film, he has nothing to do with the administration over there, but I guess it gives him something to do other than to keep watching the skies. It might help if the search engine over there was a bit better. Putting in "Voyage to the End of the Universe" might find you a post with that title in it, but you'll have to wade through every post that has "voyage" or "to" or "the" (and so on) to get to it.

As far as people getting sucked up into sand, you might want to look at INVADERS FROM MARS, specifically the 1953 version.