clore

I've checked the schedule for the month and I can't even find a 2007 movie. There is a Private Screenings dated 2006 and a 2009 Elvis Mitchell interview, but otherwise, the closest thing this month is a showing of 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY.

> {quote:title=Hibi wrote:}{quote} > Joan's character never completely loses it except towards the end. In the remake the mother starts losing her grip quite early......... I prefer it the way that it was done in the Ophuls film. I think it was deliberate as Bennett's character was not shown to have the opportunity to break down. Every where she went in the house, there was some other family member or the household help intruding on her - she had to maintain her composure. When she went out, she would run into others who might just be saying "hello" such as even in the car with Mason, she still had a neighbor in another vehicle greeting her. It seemed that she lived in a goldfish bowl and had she started freaking out, that's only going to raise questions among the many characters who make up her day. I'm perhaps wishing too hard that it was deliberate as I would not have been able to put up with another Nancy Kelly in THE BAD SEED type performance that simply wears me out. Just imagine the microscope that Bennet would have been under if she did demonstrate becoming unnerved. Not that I'm that impressed with THE RECKLESS MOMENT. I've heard about it for years and love Joan Bennett, but I'll take her work with Fritz Lang over this one - except perhaps for SECRET BEYOND THE DOOR which struck me as "deja vu all over again" in the words of Yogi Berra.

> {quote:title=hlywdkjk wrote:}{quote} > The two-hour program is called "Bombing Hitler's Dams" and is available for viewing on the PBS website - > http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/military/bombing-hitler-dams.html Thanks for the link, I'm going to check that one out.

> {quote:title=JefCostello wrote:}{quote} > Is the title of this film supposed to be a funny pun on Errol Flynn? > > He was accused of rape and that's where the saying "In Like Flynn" came from. This title sounds very similar and is inappropriate when you think about its context. > When the film was released, James Coburn made his objection to the title become quite known, even voicing it on the Tonight Show. I don't know if that's why he refused to do a planned third film in the series, but he did claim to have tried to talk Fox out of using the title out of his own respect for Flynn.

I believe that I read that Peter Jackson will be producing the remake. It's said that the footage of the aircraft was one of the inspriations for the attack on the Death Star in the first STAR WARS film. With Jackson aboard, I'm sure this will turn out to be a CGI-fest and sort of his expansion on the original just as 30 SECONDS OVER TOKYO inspired some of PEARL HARBOR.

The humor in the first Flint film was a bit more subtle as I recall. The second one goes a bit more for slapstick but then, Gordon Douglas got his start doing "Our Gang" and Laurel and Hardy films. Back when they were new, one problem that the spy spoof genre had was that they were parodies of Bond films and it didn't take Bond long to start spoofing itself. GOLDFINGER was only the third film but it was considerably lighter than the two that came before it. More recently we had Austin Powers which was more a send-up of Flint and Helm than the Bond films, right down to the ring tone of the phone.

When TCM aired the film, they did air the British print where the name wasn't censored. Supposedly a remake is coming and the dog will be called Digger.

Well, if nothing else, we get to see Lee J. Cobb in drag. The original holds up much better in my opinion, this one was never as good anyway but it's still better than any Matt Helm movie except the first one.

> {quote:title=Dargo wrote:}{quote}Wait a minute, let me try somethin' here.... > > Who around here likes that old WWII British movie, *The Dam Busters*? > > (...okay, now lets see what happens!) Now try getting away with citing the name of the dog in THE DAM BUSTERS.

You just have to understand why the auto censor exists. This is to free staff from having to patrol the message boards and free them up for more important things such as making sure that all of the commentary spoken by Osborne and Mankiewicz is accurate, that all prints are suitable for airing and in the proper length and aspect ratio. Seriously, this is nothing compared to what I've seen on some other movie boards. For a while on the IMDb boards, you could not refer to the 1982 Clint Eastwood film HONKYTONK MAN without getting censored, nor could you get away with any reference to Soderbergh's 1999 film THE LIMEY without the title being censored. Next time try using two dollar signs when you want to use that word.

In THE WOLF MAN he plays a character with the same first name and it's pronounced Bayla by Maria Ouspenskaya.

For several years now, I've been watching the Jeremy Brett SHERLOCK HOLMES episodes on WLIW every Saturday at 7pm. But otherwise, I can't find much there on a regular basis. I used to travel the East when I was in TV syndication and the local PBS stations in Boston, Pittsburgh, Syracuse and Buffalo could often keep me up later than planned with the late movies scheduled. This was before the days of TCM and I got to see many 30s and 40s films that were hardly ever aired in NYC. I've watched a few of the Saturday WNET films, but I am spoiled and avoid those that aren't in widescreen. I can't manage to work up any enthusiasm for DR. ZHIVAGO in full screen but once in a while, there's a pre-Cinemascope Fox title that catches my attention. But it's nothing like when WNET was WNTA and the bulk of the schedule was Fox titles.

Thanks for your response. That would have been the American release listed in the magazine, which may be shorter than the UK one, but at least it's the film as seen here in its initial release, and on TV in NYC as of its first showing on WABC on December 19, 1960. If they could not get what was expected, they should have just substituted another title. Although since it's on DVD in the proper langth and format, how difficult could it be for the distributor to supply the right one? I will give TCM credit for last night's ISLAND OF LOST SOULS. From what I'm reading on another forum, their print was better than the one issued by Criterion.

Do WNET and WLIW still present movies other than the Neal Gabler-hosted weekly slot? Maybe around Halloween one or the other will show some public domain titles suitable for then day if not for broadcast. I can recall the days in the 80s when WNET had multiple movies on Saturdays starting at 10pm, a treasure trove of MCA-owned stuff including the Paramount pre-48 films. Perhaps I'm not looking hard enough at their schedules, but their website does not make for easy browsing. Still, when I surf the grid on my cable syustem, both 13 and 21 are on my list and I rarely see any features. There are lots of program-length commercials for various forms of music oldies and if you pledge 100 bucks, you'll get the full-length DVD set or CD release.

> {quote:title=Swithin wrote:}{quote}As I recall, in one of the most effective scenes, Dearborn is seated at a long table, with many blind men. He speaks to them in an impeccable English accent. Was that Lugosi's voice, or was it dubbed? Lugosi was dubbed by London-born O.B. Clarence

> {quote:title=FredCDobbs wrote:}{quote}Well, I liked the version I saw. Muriel Pavlow was certainly cute Yes, a most attractive woman. Do you get the Now Playing Guide? I was wondering which version of the film was listed there. I have a sked that I downloaded on December 1, 2011 and it cites the 135 minute edition.

It's for Universal's 100th Anniversary that a bunch of films are getting the restoration treatment.

The possibility exists that the writers and other support staff don't have final say, and that Osborne brooks no disagreement with his own memory and judgment. If this is so, then it's disgraceful, and so counter-productive, since Osborne would be the one sabotaging his own reputation. That is one scary thought. I missed the intro on BALLANTRAE so I can't claim to have heard it. That would have really knocked me out of my chair as it's just too easily verified and those are the kind of errors that really annoy me. Between features I had to run an errand and got back just in time to see the WB logo. I imagine that whoever is putting these things together is doing so at a computer, not on some ancient Underwood typewriter in a dungeon room with no electricity and thus no PC. TCM has all of these promos about how one can access the site with a downloded app and access all sorts of info. Give that man an app if he's the one at fault, they run on batteries so the lack of electricity in his cell can't be an excuse. I can see someone making an error when it comes to the age of George Raft as I can find three different birth years in my library alone. Loads of studio bios would shave years off a player's age and some of these inaccuracies still manage to surface. But I've never seen any dispute over Flynn's reported age - many of his exploits have been debunked or doubted, but not his birth date. However, any possible dispute between Osborne's memory or the copy he's presented can most likely be settled if the writer is forced to supply footnotes as to his source of the info. If that person is proved wrong - or lazy - it will become apparent soon enough. Meanwhile, because of flubs like these and some of the less than worthy prints that have been airing, it does appear as if quality control is slipping.

There's also DARLING LILI

Oh the difficulties of locking yourself into a fixed theme within a theme and having interns draft the schedule. I somehow can't see them airing IN BRUGES at 3pm.

How about THE NUN'S STORY? It clocks in at 149 minutes.

I've already ordered the DVD from Amazon. Today's showing whetted my desire to see it as it should be seen.

Clearly the people who research and write up the copy for these intros have to do a better job at verifying their work. I don't expect RO to know everything or spend his time proofreading everything. I honestly don't expect Mr. Osborne to have to double-check everything. But I will say that while he was on vacation, there were far fewer such gaffes. Perhaps the copy was being checked for accuracy better since they might have a problem attracting hosts otherwise. Or else someone on the staff is going out of his/her way to make Robert Osborne look less than knowledgeable.

I couldn't find any info either on BATTLE OF THE BULGE being Oscar nominated. Maybe it's a new format this year - films we wish were Oscar-nominated. Being a weekday afternoon airing, there won't be any intro - it would have been fun to see how it would be handled. My guess is that a revision is coming.

You do that and you won't be disappointed. Well, guess what? I was disappointed. The film was at one point listed as having the UK running time of 135 minutes. It was about a half-hour short of that. The running time doesn't even match the U.S. timing of 123 minutes, at 104 minutes it matches the version seen in Germany. While it wasn't full-length, it was full-screen, the print being 1.33:1 rather than the 1.78:1 ratio as seen in theaters. It looks as if I'll have to buy the DVD to get the movie the way it's supposed to be seen - which is what TCM claims is its mission. I don't want to hear this usual excuses about what was supplied by the distributor - the same distributor managed to get the film out in the proper form on DVD.