Arturo

*I saw JOHNNY APOLLO within the last two years. I guess it was on FMC.* JOHNNY APOLLO had been meant to hve been another reteaming of Alice Faye and Tyrone Power; they had most recently been seen together the previous year in ROSE OF WASHINGTON SQUARE, where Power also played a gangster (it was loosely based on Fanny Brice's story). But Faye was unavailable, so Zanuck had to get a replacement. Both Linda Darnell and Nancy Kelly (recent Power costars) were considered, but neither was known as a singer or dancer, which was needed for the part (Linda, going on 16, would have also had her image altered very early if she had played the gun moll, problably another reason she wasn't given it). A perfect otion IMHO, although she maight not have been under contract anymore to Fox, was Phyllis Brooks, the blonde beauty recently in the news as Cary grant's girlfriend. And although she had performed as a singer on the screen, seems that the studio saw her only as a featured player, not a leading lady. Could've been a big break for her. Ironically, 20th was about to sign the perfect person for the part, Betty Grable, then making waves on Broadway. In fact, she would replace Faye a number of times inthe next few years, including her breakthrough role in DOWN ARGENTINE WAY, later that year. Anyway, the studio ended up borrowing a very good Dorothy Lamour from Paramount. She is great, especially in the "Dancing for nickels and Dimes"-wow...what legs!!!. Ironically, later that year, another movie meant for Power and Faye, BROOKLYN BRIDGE, was done for the B unit as TALL DARK AND HANDSOME, where Cesar Romero played another gangster, albeit in a runyonesque comic vein. Virginia Gilmore played the female lead (another pair of great legs). It turned out so well that the studio gave it an A promotional budget and it played A dates.

*I'm especially looking forward to Johnny Apollo - that will almost complete my "Johnny" collection ( there are several movies with "Johnny" something or other as the title.)* This is the first of the 40s Johnny movies, opening as it did in early 1940. However, I much prefer its original title, "Dance With The Devil"...sounds more noirish....

*I'm especially looking forward to Johnny Apollo - that will almost complete my "Johnny" collection ( there are several movies with "Johnny" something or other as the title.)* This is the first of the 40s Johnny movies, opening as it did in early 1940. However, I much prefer its original title, "Dance With The Devil"...sounds more noirish....

*I'm especially looking forward to Johnny Apollo - that will almost complete my "Johnny" collection ( there are several movies with "Johnny" something or other as the title.)* This is the first of the 40s Johnny movies, opening as it did in early 1940. However, I much prefer its original title, "Dance With The Devil"...sounds more noirish....

*I thought when I saw him in "Ninotchka" I thought him more of a drama star.* NINOTCHKA is considered a comedy, hence MGM's tag-line"Garbo Laughs". Melvyn Douglas gives a wonderfully comic performance in this sparkling comedy.

jamesjazzguitar wrote: *I believe Douglas was under contract with MGM and this could be why Dunne and him were never re-teamed. But yes, their chemistry is off the charts, and this is a very enjoyable movie.* TopBilled wrote: *He did AND SO THEY WERE MARRIED the same year (with Mary Astor) at Columbia. The next year he made WOMEN OF GLAMOUR at Columbia with Virginia Bruce and two years after that he and Miss Bruce made THERE'S THAT WOMAN AGAIN at Columbia. Plus, around this time he made three pictures with Joan Blondell at Columbia.* *My guess is that his contract was shared between L.B. Mayer and Harry Cohn. Irene Dunne, meanwhile, was still working at RKO, but she did several films besides THEODORA GOES WILD for Columbia.* Actually, Melvyn Douglas went under contract to Columbia in 1935, after his success in SHE MARRIED HER BOSS. In 1936, he was one of the few to come out unscathed from the debacle that was THE GORGEOUS HUSSY (the other was Beulah Bondi). MGM offered to share his contract with Columbia, whose boss, Harry Cohn, saw the MGM machine as a way to give MD top projects with that studio's many female stars, thereby making him a more valuable property at little cost to them. MGM did use him occasionally to replace an ill or reluctant William Powell, in such movies as ARSIN LUPIN RETURNS, NINOTCHKA and THIRD FINGER, LEFT HAND. Irene Dunne was no longer under contract to RKO; it expired with the completion of 1935's ROBERTA. She signed a short-term contract with Universal, and in short order, one picture a year pacts with Columbia and Paramount, and eventually RKO. I agree that Dunne and Douglas should have been re-teamed in another felicitous screwball comedy.

*Magnani and Signoret might not have substantial enough filmographies to get SUTS days;* Are you kidding? Both stars were in dozens of movies. Maybe you mean English language films, although SUTS would play any of their movies, provided, as you say, that they were able to clear the rights

*Magnani and Signoret might not have substantial enough filmographies to get SUTS days;* Are you kidding? Both stars were in dozens of movies. Maybe you mean English language films, although SUTS would play any of their movies, provided, as you say, that they were able to clear the rights

Either his wife Annabella was on the East Coast, or he was. The point is they were separated, he was on leave (or maybe not yet deployed), and the opportunity arose for the relationship. Judy's possessiveness, pregnancy (and forced abortion) led to the demise of the relationship. Those were pretty much the same issues that ended the Power-Turner affair as well.

*I was wondering why they did not have Dick Haynes star in the movie instead of Donald O'Connor. Donald O'Connor had a nice voice but not what I think of as exceptional. And I thought he was a bit miscast to be Vera-Ellen's boyfriend. Does anyone know why Donald O'Connor was cast in the movie and not Dick Haynes?* While Dick Haymes had some success in the mid 40s as a crooner and then star of musicals at 20th Century Fox (which filmed CMM), in the early 50s he was washed up as a viable movie personality. He was about to embark on a tempestuous marriage to Rita Hayworth (would Rita have it any other way?), which would cause headlines and grief for Harry Cohn over at Columbia, Rita's studio. One, because Rita would forget about movie making for the duration of the marriage. Two, because she insisted that Dick be cast in a big-budget biblical epic (JOSEPH AND HIS BRETHREN) with her, or else she wouldn't do it (it was never made). In 1953 Haymes followed his wife to Hawaii, where she was filming MISS SADIE THOMPSON. He was held from re-entering the US proper, and was going to be deported as an undesirable alien (spousal abuse was also a factor). The point is Haymes was not available, and if he had been, Zanuck was not about to offer him an important role in CMM. O'Connor, on the other hand, had just scored a huge personal success in SINGING IN THE RAIN, so it was a no-brainer that 20th offered him the role. If you think he was an unsuitable partner as Vera-Allen's BF, he was much more compatible with her than his next partner at Fox, Marilyn Monroe in THERE'S NO BUSINESS LIKE SHOW BUSINESS. BTW, another costar in TNBLSB, Mitzi Gaynor, had once been touted for the Vera-Allen role in CMM; I wonder what happened with that.

*And according to the lead page on TCM, Bette Davis supplanted her? Sad.* What actually happened was that WB and Kay had a long running feud, ever since they cut up her role in WONDER BAR, or something like that. She was their biggest female star through the mid-30s, but in 1937, while still the queen of the lot, she had very acrimonious contract talks with the studio. She got what she wanted, but an angry and vengeful Jack Warner decided to break her. First, the studio announced (in the trade papers!) that they were gonna have Kay complete her expensive contract doing B films. She was subsequently given terrible scripts, and stories bought for her (TOVARICH, THE SISTERS) were reassigned to other actresses. She was photographed unflatteringly, had dialogue full of 'r's, starred in movies where she was billed under the title, and in general treated shabbily. Publicly, she put on a brave face and did the crappy movies she was given (the studio thought she would walk out on her contract), but the treatment they meted out to her broke her heart, and her spirit. Bette Davis did inherit her role as queen of the Warner's lot.

*Warren William, looking pleased as punch over something, and Tyrone Power* The shot of Warren William and Ty Power I believe is a still from 1939's DAYTIME WIFE, also starring 15 year old Linda Darnell as the title character, Binnie Barnes and Joan Davis. I think they looked pleased as punch because Darnell (Power's wife) has just convinced Warren William's wife that they and Barnes are not having a wild night, but are wrapping up a business deal (Darnell and Barnes are William's and Power's secretaries, respectively). *Relationships with Lana Turner and Judy Garland were around the corner for Power, followed by marriage to Mexican actress Linda Christian.* Actually, my understanding is that Power and Garland's relationship happened earlier, say 1943-44, and was well over by 1946. The Power-Turner affair, however, was about to heat up magazine covers and gossip columns for the next year or so.

*willbefree25 wrote: Since Kim Kardashian is a 'star', I suppose that makes her SUT*S* worthy next year. Sad people.* Again, I am not a fan of Elvis as movie star. However, he WAS a movie star, and for over ten years churned 2-3 movies yearly, that were highly profitable as they were seen by his legions of fans. KK is in the midst of her 15 minutes, and as far as I know about her, she isn't a singer or a movie star, so the comparison to Elvis is specious. And since she is NOT a movie star, WHY would she ever rate a SUTS? While she might end up surprising with her longevity, I don't think she'll be the iconic presence in 50 years that Elvis is right now. *Kardashian isn't a good comparison but I would say Madonna is.. she did movies but no one cared* Madonna is one that DID surprise in her longevity, due to smarts in periodically stirring up controversy by pushing the sexuality envelope, and reinventing herself. However, while she has starred in movies for over 25 years, she is not a movie star... as Dargo says, nobody cared... Her choices have been all over the map critically and financially, and its a case or her dabbling in it whenever she feels like it, so she never connected on a regular basis with moviegoers.

*None of his Fox films were shown, including the essential 13 RUE MADELEINE. . .* There will be another showing of 13 RUE MADELEINE on HBO Signature, on Tuesday Aug. 21, at 3 AM.

*Presley couldn't act. A non-actor doesn't deserve to be on SUTS, and take up valuable space better given over to William Powell, who COULD act.* *Presley was not an actor, he was a commodity that the greedy executives decided to exploit and suck dry in every medium available.* While I do agree that Powell would have been a much better selection than Elvis for SUTS (and quite frankly shocked that he never had been), ths is just a reflection of my own personal preference for either. And ....It is called "Summer under the STARS"...not "Summer under the ACTORS".... Elvis was a MOVIE STAR, and that is why he is featured. You will be able find someone here belittling the acting ability of any movie star....Acting is not, and never was, a prequisite for movie Stardom. And in the studio era, ALL movie stars were treated as commodities and were exploited thus. Elvis is no different....

*Arturo, this is another example of you trying to correct previous posts and insincerely try to show up a fellow poster,* TB, my intent is not to "correct previous posts", and definitely not to 'insincerely try to show up' anyone. I was happy with TCM showing PROFESSIONAL SOLDIER, and I found your information very interesting. It just struck me odd that fo one movie you state 35 days, exactly 5 weeks, while for the other you are much less definite, mentioning holidays that fell within that period. Yes Zanuck was a workaholic, but I remember reading that it was normal practice at his studio to not film on Sundays, hence my question to you. Sometimes, it was required to film on the 7th day, to catch up, or maybe meet a certain release schedule, or whatever. I think that stars' contracts probably had provisions re; this, and especially in the case of a child actor, with child labor laws, this must have been a must. So I was curious to know if your research had suggested the seven day work week for PS....nothing more. *One thing we do know is that Louis Mayer only hired his contract stars for 40 weeks a year. They had 12 weeks off per year where they could freelance at other studios, provided Mayer approved of the project.* Now, I do feel compelled to point out something that may be misleading, imcomplete, inconsistent or flat-out wrong (not that this can't happen to me either). Such as this statement. My understanding is that most long-term studio contracts (from any of the majors) was for 40 weeks. The other 12 weeks were vacation. Usually, it was during the 40 weeks that a player would be loaned out to another studio. Thus the loanout would count to whatever projects the player was contracted to his home studio, and the studio would receive (usually lucrative) remuneration. So they normally went on loan during their regular 40 weeks.

*I believe his turn as the alcohlic husband of Grace Kelly in The Country Girl proved why he was not only one of the top box office "stars" of the '40s and '50s for whatever reason, BUT that he COULD be a pretty darn good actor when called upon.* In the 40s, he was THE top boxoffice star, and I believe he ranks in the top 3 overall EVER. He was HUGE back in the day, so of course he should definitely have been featured in SUTS, and more than once...because as you say, he may not have been one's cup of tea, but if anything he was a star. Which leads me to Elvis. Those of you who mention he was not a movie star, and therefore should not have been on SUTS, well, he WAS a legitimate movie star, coming to movies by way of his popularity as a singer, just like Bing, Sinatra and countless others. He had a large following for his movies, and through the mid 60s was usually in the Boxoffice Top Ten each year. I personally cannot get into most of his movies, but that doesn't make him less legitimate to be featured IMHO. I agree some stars, including some of my favorites, have been featured WAY too much on SUTS, or SOTM for that matter, especially when there are many other LMS (to use Dargo's expression) which have never been so honored. In terms which has most prestige SUTS or SOTM, well, I feel that there is much more of a spotlight on the star over the course of the a month. There are promos of the star's movies for the duration....some stars have MANY movies featured once a week. By contrast, you have 24 hours in August, sure, but tomorrow is another day, and on to the next pesonage. Also, the promos only feature you (as one of many) if you are normally one whose movies are usually on TCM...no 20th Century stars will be part of the promo (give or take an iconic MM). And that begs the question, as thrilled as I am that SUTS has now featured the likes of Marilyn, Gene Tierney, Linda Darnell and Tyrone Power, they HAVE NEVER been featured as a SOTM, nor will they most likely ever... So being a SUTS honoreemay be just a sop, in lieu of the bigger prize, SOTM. just rambling here...

*None of his Fox films were shown, including the essential 13 RUE MADELEINE. . .* This will be on tomorrow morning on HBO Signature, at 3:45 AM, I believe.

CITY FOR CONQUEST is also one of my favorite Cagney films. Great story and cast..Ann Sheridan made a perfect partner for Cagney; they were even better together in TORRID ZONE. She was the type of tough broad that was needed to complement the WB stable of tough guys.

*Ivanhoe was MGM'S biggest earner in 1952 making handsome profits and putting* *smiles on many who watched it...* Would that be like a gazillion wooden nickels lol? And the previous year's RT epic, QUO VADIS, was no slouch as a moneymaker for MGM.

Then there is that great 1937 comedy, a vehicle for Jean Arthur, EASY LIVING, where she is mistaken as the mistress of Edward Arnold's "Bull of Ball Street", or somesuch. So strangers come to her about tips re: buying, selling, etc. Great fun.

*It would have been more believable with Taylor as Linus. I never bought the "romance" between Bogart & Hepburn.* Actually, Cary Grant would have been the most believable. Aside from the very good reasons mentioned here, that Wilder would not have considered Robert Taylor due to politics, and the logistical one that Taylor was at MGM, and didn't seem to go on loan-outs, another reason to consider is that Taylor did not do romantic comedies, at least not during his 50s (widescreen) epic period. He had done some initially, during his first years of stardom, until the early 40s. But not since then. Whether or not it was part of his and MGM's strategy to feature him in he man roles in action films, and not just as catnip for the women stars he supported at the beginning, he didn't do any in the 50s. Additionally, he would have been far down on the list of actors to get for the romantic foil in this type of comedy, again most likely due to his apparently total disinterest in taking this type of role. Whether he would have been believable is moot; he just wasn't considered nor would HE HAVE considered it.

Lionel's was a great day indeed. I was able to record several films, including MATA HARI, which i only had on VHS. Today should be another great day of classic films. Ginger Rogers is one of my least favorite actress from the classic era (especially after the very early 40s), but I enjoy most of her movies from that period. Should be a tonic after yesterday's decidedly hit and miss James Mason day, which made maeuvering through this forum quite daunting, Edited by: Arturo on Aug 12, 2012 11:38 AM

Where is THE DESERT RATS? FMC has shown THE DESERT FOX rather frequently in the last few months, but never this sequels of sorts. Would've been cool here as a companion piece to the other.

I can watch Crawford, Bogie and Ava in just about anything. Wayne I can take or leave; his persona I always found a bit too stridently "american", especially when confronted with Native Americans, Mexicans, etc. Of more recent actors, the one I cannot stand (although I've enjoyed many of his movies) is Ben Stiller, closely followed by Owen Wilson.