clore

>>A: PSYCHO was a Paramount picture; its sets were designed and built by that studio's art department. PSYCHO was released by Paramount, but actually shot on the Universal lot using many crew members from Hitchcock's TV series in order to save time and money. Primary Art Director Robert Clatworthy was from Universal's Art Department. Message was edited by: clore

I just saw Eddie Bracken on a BURKE'S LAW rerun and was reminded of how much he belongs with the other turtles. Then there's that creature in 7 FACES OF DR. LAO that looks like Arthur O'Connell.

>>I watched this film for the first time the other night and maybe it was just me, but his performance felt like what his relationship with Hepburn was supposed to be like, in real life. Eerie. Maybe this character was much closer to his real self than any of the rugged, dependable, down-to-earth, straight-forward types he played over the years You could well be right, but that doesn't make him any more endearing to me. However, Robert Osborne did mention that Tracy cited this as one of his favorite roles, so perhaps he was honest with himself about his own shortcomings.

Sounds like THE DAUGHTERS OF JOSHUA CABE which had a couple of sequels. Each one had a different actor in the lead, going from Buddy Ebsen to Dan Dailey to John McIntire.

Try saving those Works files in RTF format. It should be an option if I remember the program properly. You'll have to do it one by one, by going to "File/Save As/File Type" and there should be a menu option for RTF files. That format opens up in any word processor. OR, there is a freeware program called "Drag and View" that will read just about any file type, you'll have to download it. You should be able to find it with Google. Tell ya what, here it is: http://www.canyonsw.com/dnv.htm

>>I'll have to say that I was really uncomfortable with Spencer Tracy's performance in Man's Castle, a film I saw for the first time last night. I read some reviews on Imdb.com after the movie last night and everyone praised it, like it was the best depression era romance film ever. But Tracy was a mean & cynical man and Loretta Young's character was naive and masochistic. Proverty does strange things to people in the movies. Here's what I posted in a thread on the film on the IMDb message boards: "I appreciated that some of it was apparently filmed in NYC (notice the extras staring at the camera in the early Times Square shots), but when they situated Park Avenue on the banks of the Hudson River, I had to laugh. Tracy's character annoyed me, maybe he was an early cinematic Borderline Personality Disorder type. One minute complimentary, the next he'd be insulting. One minute tender, the next brutish. There must have been some cuts either before or after production - characters such as the little boy and Glenda Farrell's Mae West impersonator came and went as if on a whim. I thought that Arthur Hohl and especially Marjorie Rambeau walked off with the film, although the sacrifice made by the latter at the end was a bit strained."

>>FMC showed The Bowery (1933) earlier today, which stars Wallace Beery, George Raft, Jackie Cooper and Fay Wray. Oh, am I sorry that I missed that one. I checked the web site just now and they don't have a future airing scheduled. I've only seen it once, about 40 years ago and it has been one of my favorite Walsh films ever since. Did you watch it and if so, how was the print quality?

>>Encore Westerns has been advertising that they are airing the new restored version of HOW THE WEST WAS WON. I've seen tons of ads but no movie. I like the movie and am curious to see it without those annoying lines but not enough to buy it. It's so long and my favorite part really is the little bit Pappy directed. You won't see the lines because Encore only airs pan-and-scan films anyway. I'm being sarcastic here. Judging by the promo on TCM's Classic Movie Report, the lines are still there, but they aren't as apparent since the color in the different panels matches up better now. I like the scenes with villainous Walter Brennan and the ending on the train is spectacular. Yvonne DeCarlo's stuntman husband was severely injured filming that and to help her out financially, the Duke gave her a role in "McLintock."

>>Anyway, regarding the actual thread topic, what does everyone think of the teaser poster? It reminds me that I have to get my shoe soles redone. Has Josh Brolin gotten to the point where he's billed above the title? I just get a kick out of his being cast as Bush and the fact that his father once played Reagan.

I'll add the little seen WHISTLE AT EATON FALLS, a film that I've requested a few times. C'mon TCM, it's a Robert Siodmak film that's from Columbia, you have access to their catalog.

You have a good night, I have to finish watching MUTINY ON THE BOUNTY anyway. I've never managed to get all the way through it before.

>>Our country was built on rugged individualism and personal responsibility and love for country. And that ties right in with our corrupted two-party system. Red states, blue states, "with us or against us" - all of that rhetoric designed with the intent to divide people into groups. As if there is no love of country anymore, there's only love of party, and the side effect is to hate the other guy for thinking differently. You have no idea of how I wish we lived in a Frank Capra society, where the Mr. Smith's win and the D.B. Norton's lose. It was probably from being exposed to these films when I was so young that I ended up becoming so jaded. I don't have the answers, I'm the first to admit that. But who the hell is there in government that is either smart enough to answer the questions or even just motivated enough to seek answers themselves? We get excuses, we're told it's this guy's fault, or that guy's fault - usually the other party. As you said - the average American is working 4 or 5 monts just to pay his taxes. He deserves to get a better return on his investment than he is getting. I'm glad that we found some mutual ground because it is only through such that we as a people can ever hope to get back on the right path.

>>Not true... >>Most establishment economist think the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act caused the Depression. >>You do know that is about trade don't you? >>Also, as Milton Friedman has pointed out, it was the Fed's wrong actions that caused the Depression. >>Bad monetary policy... >>He is a Nobel winner. >>Ever read him? >>In fairness, there are many positions taken as to what caused the Depression. >>You have a typical lefty position that the government should have intervened and taken care of the problem. >>You more than likely believe government is the answer to many of our problems... >>I disagree with you entirely... You were so quick to disagree that you obviously missed my having mentioned the tariff increase, I just didn't cite it by proper name. I don't disagree that it exacerbated the problem. As for more government on our backs, I believe in just the opposite. I just believe in government making better decisions when it does act. I personally have no faith in either party and am registered as an independent. I've voted as often for the GOP as I have for the Dems (and far more often for Republicans in local elections), but in our two-party system, it really is just a case of lesser of two evils. Neither party learns from history, they are both just self-serving and crony-serving bloats who are the problem, not the solution. I have no "hope" for "change" within government, I'm too old and I've spent too many years in advertising to see politics as anything other than it is. But as a child looks to its parents for solutions, I can't blame the people for expecting government to come up with them. An economic crisis (or any crisis) won't take care of itself. I don't "believe government to be the answer to many of our problems." But I do believe that they are the source to look to for answers when major problems arise. After all, what's a citizen to do, ask someone else's government to fix things? If that's a "lefty position" so be it, that's what I get for thinking that public servants should serve the public. It's hardly an insult and if you feel the need to label me, that's your problem, not mine.

>>Yes, but it has been sited that those first nine months were not a sufficient amount of time in which to do something about the stock market crash. Also, Hoover could not react sufficiently to the crash because he had to deal with the fall out of the Teapot Dome Scandal left over by Calvin Coolidge. This was a major distraction. Next time, learn your history a little better. I better learn my history a little better??? Hoover didn't have to deal with the Teapot Dome Scandal at all. The Supreme Court ruled on it in 1927 with the end result that the lands were returned to the control of the Navy. As to those nine months not being a sufficient amount of time to do something about the stock market crash - well, duhhh, it hadn't happened yet. Since you're so unaware obviously, it occurred in October 1929 and Hoover was inaugurated in January 1929. Go ahead, backpedal some more and tell me those sources that "sited (sic) that those first nine months were not a sufficient amount of time in which to do something about the stock market crash." Maybe there's a good excuse for your ignorance.

>>He was reading a book to a class of children when he was notified about what was going on. He did not make a mistake. All of you listen to me now. Bush has done everything that he could in his presidency, but the things that have happened have been out of Bush's hands. When I think of Bush, I think of Herbert Hoover. Hoover took over during the stock market crash of 1929. Guess who was blamed for the Great Depression that followed and the stock market crashing, Herbert J. Hoover. Bush was not reading to the class, they were reading to him. Hoover did not take over during the stock market crash, he was in office for over nine months when it happened. His failure to enact legislation early enough to combat the situation, preferring instead a "laissez-faire" approach because he claimed otherwise it would make people too dependent on government, is usually given as a primary factor in the rise of unemployment and failure of businesses. I said "primary factor" and not sole, single, solitary factor. Just felt that I had to make the distinction. The early actions he did take, such as sending Mexicans back to Mexico (to increase opportunities for Americans) and putting tariffs on imported goods, did nothing to solve the problem and only caused harsh reactions from the international community. Message was edited by: clore

>>Okay, an article from a Rolling Stones magazine doesn't really have much merit in this case. Everyone knows that the Rolling Stones and anyone employed by the Rolling Stones are all liberal democrats and do not give an unbiased opinion. So that whole article is pretty much worthless if you want an unbiased opinion about Bush. You have got to be kidding. The magazine doesn't have anything to do with the group. The name of the publication is "Rolling Stone" - singular. It is not affiliated with the group in any manner.

>> Did You Know That: >>Ray Milland directed two films, A Man Alone (1955) and Panic In The Year Zero! (1962). Did you know that Ray Milland also directed HOSTILE WITNESS (1968), THE SAFECRACKER (1958) and LISBON (1956)? Message was edited by: clore

Ray Danton was great in THE RISE AND FALL OF LEGS DIAMOND and it's a shame that the film has been out of circulation. It's my favorite of that brief late 50s-early 60s gangster revival that gave us BABY FACE NELSON, AL CAPONE, THE PURPLE GANG, PORTRAIT OF A MOBSTER and MAD DOG COLL.

I remember it well as I found it amusing to see Robert Shaw in the kind of role in which I first saw him. That was in a TV show called THE BUCCANEERS that aired back in 1958 when i was six years old. Another pirate film that I enjoyed came a few years later, it was titled NATE AND HAYES and starred Tommy Lee Jones. I haven't seen either of these films since they were released but would sure love to do so.

Arthur Shields and Barry Fitzgerald should look alike - they're brothers.

The young John Davis Chandler (circa MAD DOG COLL or RIDE THE HIGH COUNTRY) sure looks a lot like Steve Buscemi to me.

>>Did you know Pierce Brosnan got his start in show business on the t.v. show Remington Steele. No way - he made his big splash in the mini-series THE MANIONS OF AMERICA a year before REMINGTON STEELE, and could be spotted in bits in THE LONG GOOD FRIDAY and THE MIRROR CRACK'D even before that.

I couldn't agree more, one of my favorite movies of all time. Estelle Taylor was a revelation to me. David Landau was most effective in his role also and I've always thought that had he not passed away in 1935 that he would have become a much more remembered player. The film holds the viewer's attention throughout despite the set limitations and that must be credited to King Vidor's direction. Having grown up in NYC (albeit a bit later), I can safely say that the film does represent tenement life. Matt McHugh (Frank's brother) really impressed me as the bully of the building and yet he never really caught on, with many of his future roles being uncredited bits. As always, Sylvia Sidney is marvelous, but I have to wonder if anyone else had such troubles as she consistently had in her depression era films. The film did come out on DVD, but it must have been a limited issue and all that I can find are pricey used copies.

You will have to scroll down through an interview with a Sony executive, but it's all interesting reading anyway. http://hkfilmnews.blogspot.com/2008/07/return-of-classics-another-exclusive.html

I've seen only the first three titles on your list, and those are the only ones that I've seen this summer. I've already gotten the DVD of SHINE A LIGHT.