Film_Fatale

> {quote:title=CineMaven wrote:}{quote} > Ya gotta see "WARLOCK" starring Henry Fonda and Anthony Quinn. It seemed to have a gay subtext. And "Desert Fury" with John Hodiak and Wendell Corey that seemed to have an undercurrent. One could argue that a lot of Westerns had elements of repressed homosexual feelings. This includes several John Ford movies, for reasons that one of his biographers explained in rather lengthy detail.... although the biographer seemed to imply that Ford may have been afraid of women in general, and very uncomfortable with the subject of sex. (Oddly enough, the same things have been said about Hitchcock).

> {quote:title=ChipHeartsMovies wrote:}{quote} > In terms of the thread on Proposition 8, please understand that, for gay people, we are looking at a situation that is very scary for us. In the U.S. civil rights are very rarely taken away from anyone. While I live in New York and am not even dating anyone, much less married, it's very scary to me. I know people in California who are legally married today whose marriages may well be invalidated by the courts --- they are terrified. > You are absolutely right, Chip. What most people don't realize, however, is that this is a potential threat to the rights of everyone, not just gays and lesbians. When a very small majority can take away the rights of a minority, what makes anyone think they're going to stop with same-sex marriage? How about taking away the rights of religious minorities, racial minorities, and the physically-challenged? Oh, and just to clarify, the comments I made in regards to threads like "Movie Rambles" and "Western Movie Rambles" and the "FrankGrimes Torture Thread" where not in regards to discussing specific topics, but rather about certain people trying to ostracize others even when the subjects being discussed have absolutely nothing to do with the rights of minorities in America. Just wanted to clear that up. B-)

> {quote:title=CineMaven wrote:}{quote} > I think people just don't like posters who post ad infinitum. (Or is that ad nauseum?) > CineMaven, With all due respect, people's perceptions of what constitutes "too conversational" vary tremendously depending on the circumstances. At different points in time, I have heard such criticisms made about myself, and also about you, and Bronxgirl48, and MissGoddess. Funny thing, though, I never stopped talking to any one of you just because other people criticized you for being "highly conversational".

They are both great movies, which richly reward repeat viewings, imho.

They are both great movies, which richly reward repeat viewings, imho.

Those special effects are so very persuasive - and even moving - even when you know deep down that they were using miniatures and stop-motion animation. That is why the first *King Kong* will always be the best one ever filmed! B-)

> {quote:title=ChipHeartsMovies wrote:}{quote} > Really, it's not like I'm genuinely hurt by some ill-mannered lout, I just don't think shouting back will do anything but raise the volume. And no one was so personal that I felt I needed to complain to TCM; I just sort of ignored them. Really, posted Bible verses don't affect my day-to-day life one bit. > Oh, it isn't about shouting back. It's about TCM arguably not having done enough in regards to certain posts that were quite clearly, blatantly, homophobic. It makes TCM look bad not to do something about that kind of stuff, even if TCM staff members themselves are not prejudiced or anything. The bottom line is, nobody should have to feel like they're going to be treated like second-class TCM viewers due to the real or perceived status as a minority - sexual minority, or any other kind of minority. And I'm sure that TCM officials should agree with that, even if they haven't always done enough to stop it in the forums.

So, is anybody else watching *King Kong* right now? I get so excited when they're about to get to the island!! B-)

> {quote:title=eanm wrote:}{quote} > Encore Westerns plays The Tall T often so I have seen a few times already > I will set my DVD to record Western Union Don't they have commercials, though? Or am I getting them mixed up with AMC?

> {quote:title=ChipHeartsMovies wrote:}{quote} > I've had the same experience as Film_Fatale from a few people (and for the same reason) --- when TCM ran the gay-moved movies two Junes ago there were some extremely unpleasant comments made by people uncomfortable with gays who felt that they were under attack by the very existence of these movies, and when I posted about how positively I viewed these films some of the attacks became personal. Sad to say, a couple of times I responded unpleasantly because I was so stunned, which I regret. > > Some of you may remember that even discussion of what most of us would see as a given --- like the lesbian subtext of *Queen Christina* --- was met by absolute fury from some corners. > > The same thing seemed on the verge of happening in the threads on Proposition 8 and to a much lesser extent *Milk* in the fall. I'm personally making a serious effort to remain absolutely polite regardless. > > I have no problem with there being the occasional thread on non-movie issues (like Prop 8), and I honestly don't have a problem with people who disagree with me discussing this; honestly, in terms of the gay stuff, I recognize that most people who are so vehemently anti-gay don't really know gay people or understand why some things are important, and dialogue is important to change that, whether that's about Proposition 8 or *The Killing of Sister George* and *The Children's Hour* . Constructive dialogue, not sniping back and forth and certainly not making ugly personal statements. > > Message was edited by: ChipHeartsMovies for typos, which he simply can't find until he posts the damn thing. I'm sorry to hear about your experiences, Chip, and it's sad to say, I am not very surprised, unfortunately. This issue has already been taken up with the Public Relations department at TCM and contact has also been made with the Vice-President for Public Relations at Turner Broadcasting, Inc. Hopefully, we'll continue discussing the situation after the holidays are over. In the meantime, feel free to stop by "Movie Rambles" and/or "Western Movie Rambles", if you get a chance. Some of the folks there don't seem to interested in engaging in friendly conversations with fellow TCM fans who don't think like them.

Amidst all the fanfare over the new year, I almost forgot I'd meant to ramble on a bit about my favourite of the *That's Entertainment!* trilogy, part 3. This is the only one that was released theatrically when I'd already started becoming a movie buff, so it would have a special place in my heart anyway, even if I didn't feel it was the best of the bunch. How funny last night to hear RO say that he also thought it was the best of the trilogy! B-) The movie adds one major ingredient that they didn't use for the first two movies (which RO also mentioned) by adding several numbers that were filmed but not used for MGM musicals. There's also some alternate takes and rehearsals that help give the viewers a better idea of how difficult these musicals really were to make - such as the one that shows the little tractors moving a set around so that Eleanor Powell can dance all over the place and be filmed from a variety of different angles. I really fell in love with this documentary and all the musicals it included clips from since it was originally released in the 90's; I remember being anxious to pick up the laserdisc as soon as it came out. Since those days, the whole trilogy has enjoyed two reissues on more advanced formats - DVDs and blu-ray. What's even better about the home video presentations of these movie nowadays is that with HDTVs, it is easier to appreciate the parts of the documentaries that are in some widescreen format. Because of the many clips that were used, the documentaries needed to switch back and forth between Academy Ratio (1.33:1) and widescreen (2.35:1). These transitions are much smoother when viewed on a nice widescreen. Also, *That's Entertainment! III* was the last screen appearance of a number of MGM stars, including Gene Kelly: Of course, it's even more poignant to have watched it on the last day of 2008, due to Cyd Charisse's passing.

I won't make another list because almost every movie I would include has already been mentioned, oftentimes more than once. The only one nobody else has mentioned was *The Girl From Mexico*, a personal favourite of mine ever since TCM aired it as part of the *Mexican Spitfire* marathon in 2007. It's a great showcase for the much unappreciated Lupe Velez.

I don't even remember the first movie I watched with Randolph Scott in it, but I've grown to like him a lot since I started watching TCM. And Friday's primetime lineup really looks awesome. B-)

Lynn, sorry that we seem to disagree on this... being rude to someone who's never been anything but friendly to you still seems to me a sign of rudeness and/or lack of education. And ignoring forum users who try to make helpful contributions simply because you might have a political disagreement with them or something similar seems to me just as much a sign of rudeness and/or ignorance. All the same, it really isn't the first time I've encountered people who try to marginalize folks due to their real or perceived membership in a minority group, so it should hardly be surprising, I guess. It's just sad, but such attitudes still prevail, even in developed countries, in the 21st century.

> {quote:title=CineMaven wrote:}{quote} > See you don't even need the chocolates...though I will take one for the road. You don't mind if I take one, then, do you? They do look might yummy.

> {quote:title=Pia wrote:}{quote} > I haven't seen anyone dismissed out of hand simply because they are just discovering a place. [...] It is very strange to be thoroughly enjoying feeling a part of something - I'm referring to one of the movie game threads - then slowly getting little clues that, when push comes to shove for lack of a better phrase, someone's turn is going to be passed over so a buddy can be replied to. It just stops being fun at that point. Then I see this thread - and it all seemd to begin to make sense. And to the best of my knowledge, this is not a private, member-owned board. Pia, I think I understand exactly where you are coming from. Yes, there is a certain sense of entitlement among some of the people who post on the boards, and their attitude seems very much like they were assuming this board existed *exclusively* for their own private conversations. Just look at some threads like "Movie Rambles", "Western Movie Rambles", and "The FrankGrimes Torture Thread". While a lot of the folks who frequent those threads are genuinely friendly, there is a very small group there who has a habit of ignoring most of the other people who are just trying to be friendly to them. They do not seem to understand that this is a public forum, and that acting like they have the right to a private conversation that nobody should interrupt simply suggests lack of politeness and/or education. Anyone who wants a private conversation in a public forum should just stick to PMs, imho. Otherwise, they should be willing to engage with other forum users in a friendly and civilized manner. It should also be noted that these suddenly very unfriendly users had been extremely friendly not too long ago, but changed their tune after I spoke favourably about sexual minorities in some threads. And never once did I have a mean word to say to them or about them. So, the examples are there for everyone to see.

New this week at some video stores (BB exclusive) is Claude Chabrol's wonderfully subversive *La Fille coup?e en deux* ("The Girl Cut in Two"), starring the lovely Ludivine Sagnier. It's worth looking out for, if you can rent it. B-)

She will be missed. :|

Cutter, I suggest when you click on to any scsu's response...you turn your head away from your keyboard. It's a very good suggestion.

Gene Lockhart

Thank you, ILRM, hopefully more folks will join in the coming weeks. Don't forget that once you set up your profile, you can invite any number of friends you like. B-)

Greetings to everyone, As some of you already know, I'm one of the Network Creators of the new TCM Fans Social Network. You're welcome to drop by and visit, and/or create your own profile! You can upload as many photos and/or videos to your profile as you like. *TCM Fans Social Network* http://tcmfans.ning.com

Thanks again to everyone who has signed up so far; I realize many folks are quite busy due to the Holidays, but I'm happy to see that so far people seem to be liking the format of this social network. Of course, you can choose any picture or logo you like to accompany your profile. If you don't have any available, you will get a temporary default picture (TCM logo) and you may add a photo later. Adding photos or videos to your profile is also easy, whether you upload them from your computer or another website. *TCM Fans Social Network* http://tcmfans.ning.com

That's a good point, Chip. It's hard to feel awfully nostalgic for something that was just released a decade ago. Hence it would make sense not to include any 60's movies in the first *That's Entertainment!*.

> {quote:title=metsfan wrote:}{quote} > That's the beauty of Gwynplaine. He brings laughter to some and horror to others(especially on this board it seems). To me, he just seems like a jolly fellow.