clore
-
Posts
5,535 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by clore
-
-
It must have confused Barbara Stanwyck. She was in the 1942 film THE GAY SISTERS with Byron Barr who was playing Gig Young. Then she's in the 1944 DOUBLE INDEMNITY with a guy named Byron Barr who in no way resembled the guy who changed his name to Gig Young.
The rules on stage names are set by the Screen Actors Guild. Since the Byron Barr of the 1942 film was no longer using that name professionally, having twice been billed as Gig Young, I'm guessing that it opened the door for the second Byron Barr to use that name.
-
The main character in THE LAST TYCOON is a fictionalized version of Thalberg and there's also Robert Evans as Thalberg in MAN OF A THOUSAND FACES but that's hardly a major part of the film.
-
Blake did play Hoffa in a mini-series titled BLOOD FEUD. I thought that he was much better than Nicholson whose movie came about a decade later.
I also very much liked the TV movie he made with Randy Quaid of OF MICE AND MEN. Blake made a fine George and while it wasn't up to the 1939 film, I did like it more than the Gary Sinese film.
His appearances on Johnny Carson were legendary, especially when he started commenting on "the suits" who run the industry.
-
It just worked out that way that Tom Brown (his birth name) played TOM BROWN OF CULVER.
-
What you call "over emoting" I always saw as "intensity".
I'm confused now as earlier you cited Blake as being one who "ALWAYS chewed the scenery." I wouldn't necessarily equate "intensity" with "scenery chewing" but hey, if you do then I'm glad to know for future reference. Cagney can be intense, but he's not swallowing props at the same time.
However, I'm also confused as you've responded to yourself yet you are quoting my post.
But for clarification, I'm not saying that Blake "over-emoted" throughout the film, but his bouts of paranoia / claustrophobia were a bit over-the-top. It may have been the dialogue that forced or caused that, it might have been better to just have him show his fear through his eyes and body language. However, one doesn't get to do much molding of a character when on a three-week shooting schedule.
Otherwise, for most of the film he was rather controlled, and more chilling by being that way than by a lot of snarling and shouting. I really did like Marc Cavell as his sidekick Hank, too bad there wasn't more of his character.
-
> {quote:title=MissGoddess wrote:}{quote}I wanted to alert that an interesting western with Barbara Stanwyck, Glenn Ford and Edward G. Robinson is on Thursday, May 10 at 6:15 p.m. It also features one of my favorites, Brian Keith in a naughty role. The movie is *The Violent Men* and it's directed by Rudolph Mate. It feels in some respects like an Anthony Mann western.
If I were a man on crutches, I would not want to be married to Barbara Stanwyck.
Her track record isn't too good.Robinson is only in the film because Broderick Crawford fell off a horse early on in shooting and had to be replaced.
-
I watched it, I had no problem with it, I'm always one to enjoy hearing about the process of making films - whether it's in this era or the past.
It's the kind of thing that probably serves both interests - TCM and the AFI. Which one "pressured" the other isn't important. It may serve one more than the other, but sometimes you have to do that in a relationship.
It's one hour out of 720 in a month. It got two Cagney films onto the schedule tonight, so both coasts got a prime time look at one Cagney film or the other. The two featured tonight on the special were inspired by old films and they were there to inspire prospective filmmakers.
The beat goes on.
-
Back in 1960, I saw this film on a triple-bill with THE RISE AND FALL OF LEGS DIAMOND and BABY FACE NELSON. Seeing it again took me back, I remembered the concrete overcoat scene as soon as I saw the eventual victim.
THE PURPLE GANG wasn't too bad a film, although the skimpy budget was quite obvious by all of the stock footage being used in montages. Blake's over-emoting was balanced by Barry Sullivan's minimalist (as usual) performance, the description of the latter not being used as a negative.
-
Letterboxing would still be required for a film such as THE BOSTON STRANGLER which was a 2.35:1 ratio. Widescreen TVs are 1.78:1.
-
But are you all really taking issue with the OP being subtle rather than direct? Isn't there already too much blatancy in the world?
Not really taking issue - I would not have brought it up if he hadn't mentioned that no one was discussing Curtis' performance. Maybe that could have been phrased a bit differently as in his kicking off the conversation with a rave and then soliciting opinion rather than complaining that no one was discussing what he had in mind.
The only reason that I set up a separate thread about the print quality was because I was hoping to gain the attention of someone connected with TCM so they could make adjustments before the next airing.
From my perspective, it's a matter of leading a horse to water when posting a thread. There's no harm in making the objective clear, it's less a matter of blatancy and more one of expediency.
-
Guess that's why it's still a work in progress schedule!
One never knows. They're doing such things with computers these days that I've no doubt that the day will come when we could have a GONE WITH THE WIND featuring Gary Cooper and Bette Davis as Rhett and Scarlett.
The idea of Eva Marie Saint in the Donna Reed role in FROM HERE TO ETERNITY is a tantalizing thought.
-
The copy that I saw on FMC may have been a tape copy since it was that long ago. I have no idea as to how long FMC may have been operating digitally.
-
Eva Marie Saint is in FROM HERE TO ETERNITY? I know that this is one of TCM's perennials, but to run it on All-Saint
day seems to be stretching it since she isn't in it. -
Obviously there's nothing TCM could have done about it. I'll have to dig out an older copy I recorded from Fox Movie Channel and compare it.
No, I don't expect TCM to have been able to do anythng about it beforehand, but I do expect them to demand a better print for the next time. I saw it on FMC about five or six years ago, and the print was as it should be.
But non-montage sequences were affected also. I gave up after about 15-20 minutes thinking that maybe it only affected the first reel.
-
> {quote:title=slaytonf wrote:}{quote}The OP would have been happy to see another poster start a new thread about the film. He thinks Curtis' performance merits discussion and comparison with other actors' finest work.
I don't disagree with you that the performance merits discussion, but am thinking that you could have set-up the thread for it in a better way. Perhaps to have declared it as a film worth going out of the way to see to marvel at his performance, rather than just "he's coming."
When Curtis passed away, there was a thread on the IMDb asking about what users thought to be his best performance and this was the one that I chose. My perspective was that while Sidney Falco may have put him on the map dramatically, it was in some ways a role that still relied upon him to use his natural charm, he was just using it for a different kind of personal gain than to end up with the girl.
I've always thought that his best performances were when he played real-life people - Houdini, Ferdinand Demara, Ira Hayes and Albert DeSalvo.
-
> {quote:title=stjohnrv wrote:}{quote}Many many years ago when i was just a pup I vaguely remember a horse race film with Walter Brennen( I think) wherein he goes to rich neighbor to claim a horse owing to him. Now this rich neighbor is a dishonest bloke and attempts to hide what he believes is his best horse where Walter won't find him. While walking through the farm Walter hears a groom singing "postman run the mile in 48, 48 going to the races going to the races" ... and that's how much I remember anyone out there got a feel for this movie and remembers it name?
That was KENTUCKY, there's a pic of a poster and a shot of Brennan further down the thread.
-
> {quote:title=ginnyfan wrote:}{quote}Obviously, this dense poster didn't get it yesterday, but the film is the highlight of Curtis' work.
It does amuse me that he comments on Curtis' performance not being discussed after the film has aired, when he's had two days and how many posts here beforehand, and he never mentioned it either.
Other than to say a hole in Curtis' filmography will be filled and he hoped it would be as good as he remembered. OK, that's his right but there's some proverb about reaping and sowing that may apply.
It started out seeming as a gag thread (as in the old "the viper is coming" routine), so I'm not surprised that it hasn't encouraged any discussion. Nor had anyone made a mention about the less than satisfactory print in this thread until the OP did, so if the conversation wasn't going the way he'd prefer, maybe he should have driven in another direction in the first place.
The old routine I spoke of had numerous warnings of "the viper is coming" but ended with a knock on the door and the gag line of "I come to vipe your vindows."
-
A lot of talk about run times and prints, but not a word about Tony Curtis' performance.
Sorry, but I refused to watch it the way it was presented, I would not have been able to appreciate his performance - or that of anyone else.
But since I was pumped up to see the film, I did order a DVD. I've seen it already. I saw it back in 1968 plus several times since and I agree that it's a great performance, up there with his work in SWEET SMELL OF SUCCESS and THE OUTSIDER.
-
I tried different settings, I even turned to the SD version - it was hurting my eyes to watch it this way. I just ordered a DVD from a secondary seller at Amazon, cost me less than seven dollars with postage included.
-
I've noticed, I started a thread in General Discussions. It's the opposite of the LI'L ABNER problem which was squeezed from top to bottom and everyone looked heavier. With this one, everyone appears too slender, as did the width of the police car that George Kennedy drove to meet the hooker.
Given the thread title, I can't help but be reminded of a blurb from columnist Jack O'Brian back in late 1967. It said "Tab Hunter's all choked up about getting the lead in THE BOSTON STRANGLER." It appears that it was the work of an overenthusiastic P.R. guy - like Sidney Falco maybe?
-
It's a Panavision film, should be a 2.35:1 ratio. But it's filling up my widescreen TV from top to bottom. There should be black bars top and bottom.
It looks to be too squeezed, the actors appear too slender.
-
The on-air listed line-up of the next three films after IN COLD BLOOD showed 10 RILLINGTON PLACE as starting at 12:30am rather than the previously listed 12:15am.
THE ONION FIELD will start at 2:30am and as it runs 126 minutes, that won't affect MIDNIGHT AND THE GARDEN OF GOOD AND EVIL from starting at the listed 5:am.
-
-
Wow, LEGIONS OF THE NILE? There's an urban legend about this film, that Fox only bought the American distribution rights in order to shelve it as they had their own CLEOPATRA in the works.
However, I saw it theatrically in 1961 although I've never run across it since.
Her track record isn't too good.
day seems to be stretching it since she isn't in it.
Joel McCrea for Star of the Month
in General Discussions
Posted
Other than the all-too-common FIOS failure ruining the overnights last night,...
Did your system go down also? I'm on Time-Warner cable and about 15 or 20 minutes into ESPIONAGE AGENT, the screen went blank and the cable box started to reboot. But it became stuck while doing so and I unplugged it for 30 seconds to attempt a reboot. It froze again and a call to TW service had their automated equipment attempt another reboot - to no avail.
I gave up at that point and started to get ready for sleep but about 10 minutes away from the end of the film, the system came back on. But the sleeping pills kicked in and I didn't see the end of THE LOST SQUADRON. That was probably a blessing since I've seen it already and a second film with Robert Armstrong playing an annoying drunk was more than I could take in one night's viewing.