Arturo

Well it is possible. TCM seems to regularly show THE TENDER TRAP and HIGH SOCIETY, plus Fox' ALL ABOUT EVE. Last year on SUTS on Linda Darnell's day I believe they showed EVERYBODY DOES IT and A LETTER TO THREE WIVES, the latter also an Essential (ok so it's only Celeste's voice but her character is omnipresent). Another Fox movie I believe tha TCM has shown is THE SNAKE PIT. Now if only TCM can get GENTLEMEN'S AGREEMENT, ROAD HOUSE and/or CHICKEN EVERY SUNDAY, and maybe the film she made on loan CHAMPAGNE FOR CAESAR, and quite a tribute can be done. PS- and how can I forget, that tomorrow night, as part of TCMs evening of Loretta Young movies, COME TO THE STABLE will be featured. Surely this can also be repeated in a tribute to Celeste Holm. Edited by: Arturo on Jul 25, 2012 2:19 AM

*Do you mean THE FEARLESS VAMPIRE KILLERS, the comedy by Roman Polanski?* Yes that's the one. *That Mexican movie was called THE CRYING WOMAN.* Not where I saw it...must've been LA LLORONA, which translate into the title you listed.

The first movie I remember watching was at a drvie-in, when I was about 3 years old. It was a Mexican movie about the legend of La Llorona; I don't Know what it was called but it could've been LA LLORONA. I remember it scared the be-jesus out of me, and I tried to hide under the car seat. My parents explained that La Llorona comes after little children and drowns them, so I better be good and obey. I guess that is why La Llorona is still effective to scare kids to this day. At one of the downtown movie theaters in Tijuana, before I was 4 years or so, I remember seeing PINOCHO, THE PARTY and THE AMAZING VAMPIRE KILLERS. All except the Disney one were fairly recent releases, so I don't know if they count. On TV, once we lived in Los Angeles, I remember the Million Dollar Movie, the Fabulous 52, The Late Show, Ben Hunter's Matinee, etc. The earliest movies I remember were those that were repeated all week; I've mentioned here before that my dad (who had played on a Mexican minor league baseball team) loved DAMN YANKEES (or maybe Gwen Verdon); we would see this one every night while on (Ray Walston's devil terrified me). Also remember seeing all week THE CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON and some dinosaur movie (THE LAND THAT TIME FORGOT?). We also watched episodes of the 3 Stooges and Our Gang/Little Rascals (although they seemed to have been syndicated under the name of THE MISCHIEF MAKERS. We watched all types of movies from the 30s-50s, from Westerns, Gangsters, Comedies, War movies, etc. Later, also the Universal horror movies on Creature Feature, Chiller, Seymour Presents, etc.

*Ya see, as beautiful as Dolores Moran was, she was still pretty much a "dime-a-dozen" in this regard, as "Hollywood" has always had an adundance of that.* And the thing is, the history of ALL of the Hollywood studios during the classic era are littered with the Dolores Morans and Martha Vickers, beautiful sexy girls that flirted with stardom but never made it. The reasons can be many, but suffice to say the studio system offered many girls a standard contract, with six month options; it was always at the discretion of the studios whether or not the option would be exercised. The vast majority of the girls were used for cheesecake shots, and maybe, as an extra or bit player. Some got featured and supporting roles, as the studio sized up their potential. But in the end, most were dropped at the time of their first option. 20th Century Fox was a studio that often gave newcomers a lead role in a movie. Sometimes this would be followed by other leads, but usually she was quickly demoted to supporting roles (possibly with leads in B movies). The list of those that got early leads, only to slide back down, included Nancy Kelly, Arleen Whelan, Marjorie Weaver, and Brenda Joyce (and these were just in the late 30s-beginning of 40s). Occasionally, one would fare better: Linda Darnell, Gene Tierney and Betty Grable for the same approximate time frame. Later in the 40s, the same dynamic applied at the studio: actresses given important roles early, not able to sustain them: Sheila Ryan,Faye Marlowe, Peggy Downs, Nancy Guild, Colleen Gray, Helen Westcott; while others were more successful: Jeanne Crain, June Haver, Jean Peters. Perhaps the most tortuous trajectory was probably that of Marilyn Monroe. She was dropped by Fox after a year of extras and bits (sometimes left on cutting room floor); picked up by Columbia and given a lead in a B musical; dropped after six months; a couple of years of independent scrambling for bits wherever she could get them, culminating in two featured roles in important pictures; new contract at Fox, which led to stardom a couple years hence. At any point, she could have ended up with a movie career not nearly as substantial as Dolores Moran, Phyllis Brooks, Helene Reynolds, Randy Brooks, Marion Marshall, etc. etc. etc..... Edited by: Arturo on Jul 23, 2012 5:24 PM

Right now I don't remember which movie adaptation of Shakespeare it was, but a classic era film based on one of his works got a lot of derision from a credit.."Additional Dialogue by...".

*It should've been a young Lana Turner as Juliet and maybe a young Richard Carlson as Romeo.* Well maybe not Lana as she hadn't yet been discovered at Schwab's Drugstore (or wherever). That wouldn't have until at least a year after R&J was filmed. Maybe Elizabeth Allen, Rochelle Hudson or Gloria Stuart. But other than their being WAY too old, I think the two stars do a great job.

I always remember a writer's brief description of this movie in a rundown of Constance Bennett's filmography (offhand don't remember who wrote it or where I read it) . . . "THE EASIEST WAY . . . she took it" Anyways, this film in well known as one of several that came out in short order in the first half of 1931, all featuring Clark Gable, where he went from unknown to a sensation as the latest heartthrob/gangster. I think he was in like 9 or 10 releases that year, by the end of which he was a full-blown star.

*I can see TCM maybe putting together a few of her films some evening in the future. If not before SUTS, then in September. Her best film was CHICKEN EVERY SUNDAY. I can watch that movie over and over again. Such a gem.* I agree. Both she and Dan Dailey were at their most winning in this heartwarming film. It plays on occasion on FMC, so hopefully TCM can acquire the rights to show it.

I think Victor Mature's acting talents were sorely underappreciated, including by himself. But he gave some strong performances over the years. Even more than for KISS OF DEATH, I think he deserved to be nominated for his Doc Holliday in MY DARLING CLEMENTINE.

*Of course they are spoofing Garbo in SILK STOCKINGS and THE IRON PETTICOAT. They are looking to her earlier performance and borrowing heavily from it. What does it matter if SILK STOCKINGS is a musical. The point is that Garbo, who never really left the public imagination, was the inspiration behind performances for decades.* *And I really do not think they were trying to make a statement about the Iron Curtain. This was light-hearted MGM entertainment. It was not intended as a political diatribe about the cold war.* I have to disagree. Carole Lombard WAS spoofing Garbo in PRINCESS COMES ACROSS, playing as she was a Swedish princess. Because of Garbo's huge fame, anybody playing a character from Scandinavia would definitely use an accent that is what the public would expect from what Garbo had led them to believe. Same thing with Norma Shearer in IDIOT'S DELIGHT, when she masquerades as a European (a part MGM had intended for Garbo). No one accused Hedy Lamarr of spoofing Garbo when she did COMRADE X, highly derivative of NINOTCHKA, because she had her own foreign accent that fit the part (so far as the average American knew). But Lombard and Shearer are Americans, so it was assumed they were spoofing Garbo, because the roles were people pretending to be (vaguely) from the same part of the world as GG. Now, 20 years later, a musical remake of NINOTCHKA has Cyd Charisse performing the Garbo role in NINOTCHKA (it being a "musical' remake has nothing to do with my point-the operative word is Remake); she is NOT spoofing Garbo, she is playing the same role. She has to come up with a semi-believable accent to pull it off, and audiences are already conditioned to Garbo's for just this type of character. So she tries to borrow Garbo's accent; this has nothing to do with spoofing-I repeat-she is playing the same part. Lombard and Shearer were not . . . but they drew upon's Garbo's known persona for their characterizations for roles that GG had nothing to do with. The same is with the IRON PETTICOAT (and , yes I know it wasn't a political diatribe, but it was at the height of the Cold War); Hepburn is an American playing a Soviet. Well, a takeoff on Garbo's accent, shorthand for foreigner from somewhere in Europe, is what Hepburn does; however, she is in no way spoofing her; just playing a part similar to in a film similar to GG's in NINOTCHKA.

Maybe as an "Essential"?

From a quick scan of the picture you posted, I thought it was a young Ann Sheridan.

*MGM paid two other actresses to spoof Greta Garbo in movies they remade. Cyd Charisse does an impersonation in SILK STOCKINGS and Kate Hepburn pokes fun at Garbo in THE IRON PETTICOAT. Both films recycled the plot from NINOTCHKA.* Actually, since as you mentioned, both use plot elements of NINOTCHKA (with SILK STOCKINGS a musical remake of same), neither actress is actually spoofing Garbo, much less encouraged to do so. They saw the character to be played was from behind the Iron Curtain (at a time when that meant Everything), and so they did their versions of Russian accents, which may or may have not coincided with that of the great Garbo. *So to single out Lombard, when everyone else was getting in on the act and getting paid to do it, seems rather unfair. Especially when these other two were encouraged to rip off Garbo at her former studio.* The significant difference here is that Lombard did it when Garbo was at the height of her fame...in the mid-30s. The others did it 20 or so years later, when Garbo's name, while still a magical movie name, was already from the past; she hadn't done any movies at that point in some 15 or so years. It meant a whole lot more, and the spoofing definitely more timely, and possibly more cutting (if so intended) at the time when Garbo was filming, or about to film, what was arguably her greatest triumph, CAMILLE.

JonasEB wrote: > {quote:title= }{quote} > {quote:title= Arturo wrote:}{quote}It's as we were just discussing in another thread....the auteur theory has sidelined MOST of these directors from the studio era, and focuses discussion on a hand full of "anointed" names. > Name one artform that is any different. > and... > You're free to do the same for a Jack Conway or a Michael Curtiz. Just making entertaining films is perfectly fine (and which auteur theory is applicable, in fact)...but it's different from what many of the canonical directors achieved. Instead of bellyaching about perceived shortcomings, why not do the heavy lifting yourself and write a critical analysis of a Curtiz or Conway that shows them to be the equal to a Ford or Hawks? But that doesn't matter if you're looking for something entirely different out of films in the first place. > J.EB: > You're right. I don't care all that much about films as an artform...unless it's the art of entertainment. I definitely don't come to TCM as some sort of Film School extension program. I come to be entertained. To appreciate the artisanry present in the numerous departments that contributed to the classic studio era moviemaking. To enjoy the world of make believe on soundstages featuring beautiful and glamorous stars, and old friends in the supporting players and character actors. To enjoy a long lost world and its mores, and mourn its passing. I couldn't care less about which movies had some innovative camera angles, which point of view reflected a director's ouvre, who steered a studio product over the threshold into the rarified realm of 'art". I can appreciate all that, but i don't focus on it by a long shot. So no need to prove that Conway or Curtiz are the 'the equal to a Ford or Hawks" because I enjoy the movies of all of these filmmakers, and all are equally worthy in my book, with or without "a critical analysis" of their body of work. So yes I have a problem with those that are sidelighted in the name of 'art', but it's mostly on the reputations of those considered "less than", and thus less well known even here among many TCM fans, when as numerous postings on threads here attest to people's surprise and amazement that directors they had never heard of have been responsible for so many entertaining movies that they enjoy and are familiar with. That is what I think is a great disservice in the name of art and the auteur theory.

*In Old Chicago or Nightmare Alley or Laura or Hangover Square or (joy of joys!) the elusive Cluny Brown.* * *Hangover Square really ought to be an Essential. It's one of the those classics that even people who aren't "in" to classics can enjoy.* ADW:* *I think that any of the above would be appropriate as a TCM Essential...moreso than a couple that were selected for this year: GOODBYE GIRL, THE WAY WE WERE (still have something against 70s movies-and more recent ones-getting shown as much as they do on TCM). *

I *think it's amazing that some of these great directors made so many great films, yet their names are almost unknown today.* It's as we were just discussing in another thread....the auteur theory has sidelined MOST of these directors from the studio era, and focuses discussion on a hand full of "anointed" names.

*As Your Desire Me was not a spoof of anyone - it has never been even insinuated as a spoof of Deitrich Deitrich was not even on the scene yet per se in Hollywood - in 1932* This is incorrect. Dietrich arrived in Hollywood and made her first American film in 1930, MOROCCO, which was released at the end of the year. She was a sensation in it, and along with THE BLUE ANGEL, made her a very hot commodity by the end of that year. *and it was a Paramount B film - Garbo never made a B film!* This was one of that studio's A films for 1936. Carole Lombard became a STAR after 1934's TWENTIETH CENTURY, moving up from being a popular leading lady prior to that. She found her niche in the zany comedies, and her ability to play them. Subsequent films such as HANDS ACROSS THE TABLE and PRINCESS COMES ACROSS kept up her popularity; this would increase shortly with her two best known comedy roles: MY MAN GODFREY and NOTHING SACRED. Even before this ascent to the top in 1934, her leading lady roles were all in A features (albeit some might be programmers); there is no way Paramount was going to cast her in a B movie. I repeat: Lombard was a STAR at this point, and the studio was not going to potentially hurt her box-office by not making sure she was given the best possible vehicle. Again, you not caring for this film does not make it a B picture; nor do the over 75 years since its release.

*Topbilled wrote:* *The problem with this is that deserving studio directors like Vincent Sherman or my personal favorite Mitchell Leisen do not get their due and are historically neglected by film critics and theorists.* I couldn't agree more...the Auteur theory has shunted aside many deserving directors, even those that may have been renowned and very successful in their day, as "hacks'. Totally unfair in most instances.

Jane Withers was well known for her imitations, and was given the opportunity to do them in some of her vehicles. Offhand, I can't think of who she did. Will get back to you on that.

*I'd love to see COME TO THE STABLE again. I wonder if they could digitally remove Loretta Young from the film? Because that's the only way I'd be able to sit through it again without throwing something at the screen.* Actually, I think Loretta is the best thing about the movie, in a role that had been intended for Gene Tierney. While Celeste is very good, her French accent grates after awhile. Wonderful holiday movie, with a great cast. Both Young and Holm were nominated for Oscars, if I remember correctly; Best and Best Supporting, Actress, respectively.

*R.I.P. Celeste Holm! She was wonderful in "All About Eve" and "Gentleman's Agreement" Quite a few people I know wanted her character in Gentleman's Agreement to end up with Peck, not McGuire's.* I too always thought that he shopuld have gone after the fun Holm character, what a sport, and not that drip-"the nice people that say nothing"- that McGuire played. Seems that that's how it's heading when Greg speaks to her and she says something to the tune of "it's never too late" . . . very ambiguous as to the meaning..but he goes for the wrong one IMO. *I guess Bette Davis didn't speak to her at all during off carmera times of "All About Eve"* I've read where Davis glowered at her after the scene at 21 (?) 'where the elite meet", when she goes on laughing and laughing nervously. Bette exclaimed something to the effect of "HOW does she do that!? I CAN'T do that!' Also at their first meeting (for a reading), Celeste greeted Bette, to which she replied (again not sure exactly how it went) something about "F***ing Good Manners!" Not an endearing remark methinks.

*Eugenia wrote:* *You probably won't like my post, johnbabe, but I love this film. I don't think the writers meant to be mean-spirited toward Garbo. When I see Lombard with her "royal affectations", complete with Swedish accent, it makes me laugh out loud. To look at it positively, Garbo's popularity and recognition was such that movie audiences got the spoof right away. It was just in good fun. :)Lombard (as her character) didn't do anything* *particularly vulgar, right?* I too think this was great, non-mean-spirited fun (how does the saying go..."imitation is the sincerest form of flattery"?). This is Lombard settling into her Queen of the Screwball Comediennes role. Great cast and great fun. Here I go again with one of my pet peeves: *johnbabe wrote:* *did anyone bother to watch this B picture on saturday night past? . . . . this was a Paramount B vehicle . . . . TCM had a full evening of B pics this past saturday night - i hope they back on the track again . . .* jb ....And RaquelV... Ok now...all of Saturday's lineup, featuring Fred MacMurray as leading man, were A features. They all had top stars at the peak of their game....Kate Hepburn, Carole Lombard, Claudette Colbert . . . Come on now, you don't get nominated for a Best Actress award for starring in a B movie. Whether you TODAY don't find the movie entertaining, or important, or maybe it ruffled your feathers, does not mean it should be denigrated as a B, because none of these were when released, either in terms of the talent involved, or of the budgets for production or promotion.

Clore and Tom: Thank you both for posting the pictures that I was unable to of Bob Hope and Linda Darnell.. If you'll notice, each picture is a different one, but of the same meeting.

Beyond the Vincent Sherman movies, you mean, who was highlighted yesterday? WBF25; Also including AUTUMN LEAVES and THIS MODERN AGE, shown within 24 hours or so of the Sherman/Crawford trio. Joan is one a a number of stars that are featured very often on TCM; usually these stars are from MGM and Warner Brothers. No explanation necessary to have several of their films on, but you can bet they get their yearly birth day tribute as well as regular SUTS and SOTM salutes. Edited by: Arturo on Jul 14, 2012 2:32 PM

Thanks Tom and IzC...can't seem to do it. I have saved onto my laptops two stills of Linda and Bob, but can't get them on here.