Arturo

Sepiatone wrote: "Film Noir" is a French term for "black film" and a term for a cinema style that dates back to German expressionist cimematography of the late '30's. Oddly, the term "film Noir" wasn't coined for these types of movies, some dating back to the mid '30's, until 1946. Not all B&W crime movies from this period(mid '30's-1956) are neccessarily "noir", nor are all "noir" films neccessarily crime movies. ST; It's not odd at all that the term wasn't coined until 1946. It was the French who recognized certain traits in American films of the 1940s, and to which they were just seeing....these films were unavailable to them until after WW2. The "German Expressionist cinematography of the late 30's" predates this period, going back to the 20s; it's just that in the mid-to-late 30s, a wave of German filmmakers and cinematographers arrived in Hollywood, fleeing nazi Germany, and helped kick start this visual influence in American films.

Another expensive Criterion releases of Fox movies which I have is UNFAITHFULLY YOURS. Guess Criterion is a firm believer of the auteur theory, and prefers to deal with the films of renowned directors. I doubt that these Criterion releases will become part of the Fox Cinama Classics series...since that seems to focus on movies that don't have a manufactured dvd release Edited by: Arturo on Jul 14, 2012 1:44 PM

Here's a pairing that surprised me: Bob Hope and Linda Darnell. I found this on e-bay; it apparently was in 1957, as there was also on e-bay a contract specifiying the terms of Linda's participation in a Hope television show. never mind....ok now, I've seen instructions on how to cut and paste pictures here; apparently I cannot do it the regular cut n paste way, although it just may be my laptop, which doesn't allow me to do certain basic stuff

Topbilled, PICK UP ON SOUTH STREET is a Criterion title. I know, because like Dassin's NIGHT AND THE CITY and THIEVES' HIGHWAY, I paid over twice as much for each of those three Criterion DVD releases of 20th Century Fox movies, than if they had been (rightfully) part of the Fox Film Noir series of releases.

Wow when was that picture taken of Flynn and the 3 ladies? Again, kind of sad, he was soooo young and really "beautiful" in this picture and then to think of what happened to him toward the end! I mean I realize we all age, but at the end his looks took a real "hard" hit. Alcohol and drugs don't make for "graceful" aging. I am sure those three didn't mind having their picture taken with Errol Flynn on that day. Lori: Since one of the three ladies is Lila Damita, Errl flynn's wife, SHE might've minded the presence of the other two: Marlene Dietrich and Carole Lombard...lol

Got me there Clore. But ionly because i wasn't more specific in stating the "Summer" franchises...which is what I meant. If memory serves me, the Friday the 13th franchise were released to coincide with an actual, Friday the 13th, and thus was not a summer blockbuster series.

Not sure if this correct (since I don't know what time of year it was released) but I think AMERICAN GRAFITTI would count as the first summer blockbuster (if it was released at that time of year). But it doesn't seem to directly corelate to a wave of summer blocbusters in its wake, unless JAWS is the result. JAWS' legacy include the first summer blockbuster to have sequels (or franchises as the industry calls them), of which as mentioned here, only the second one was any good IMHO. The second one did have a memorable tag-line, which lives on i believe..."Just when you thought you were safe to back in the water"...or something along those lines. And it was the first franchise to have the third installment to be in 3-D.

Topbilled wrote: Probably what hurt him, and remember this was the age of columnists like Hedda and Louella, was that news of his homosexual lifestyle started to leak out. That combined with the other actors returning from the war sort of made him less viable. He made a few smaller-budgeted films after Fox dropped him before calling it quits in the movies. Topbilled: From what I remember reading, Zanuck hit the roof when he saw a fan magazine spread, with pictures, of his and fellow juvenile leading man Lon McACallister, showing their last night together before Lon shipped overseas. One photo even had Eythe giving McCallister a firendship ring. Along with this, Eythe was a free thinker; along with being very opiniated and self-centered, and expressing disdain for the Hollywood mentality of money-making, and making movies for a juvenile mindset. All very true, especially today, but he wouldn't abide by their attempts to keep quiet, and these statements ntrually didn't ingratiate him with the front office.

I agree that UNDER CAPRICORN is long, slow and suspenseless. However, I don't find it all that bad; it is beautifully shot and it has good performances all around. However, what I don't like about the movie is Joseph Cotton, giving another of his insufferable surly performances. I don't mean to offend any fans, but I have never understood his appeal. He's a good actor, and i guess some might find him attractive, but I just don't get it. HE is what makes this movie virtually unwatchable for me; and I don't understand Bergman's devotion to him at all costs, no matter what she feels she's indebted to him. It makes the plot totally implausible for me. I have this same reaction to him in other films as well; I was with Marilyn in having him bumped off in NIAGARA.

i believe that's at Irwindale where they want to build the stadium, a few miles away up th 605 fwy from the Vineland. Irwindale has a lot of open land, gravel pits, etc. because it sits in the floodplain of the San Gabriel river as it comes out of the San Gabriel mountains. It wasn't suitable for farming and guess it's too risky for residences.

Yes, 20th Century Fox signed William Eythe while a hit on Broadway, AND bought the rights to film stage hit Eythe was in, but this was NOT "The Eve Of St. Mark", but "The Moon Is Down". Eythe did not repeat his role in TMID, as Fox cast Peter Van Eyck in the role of the hysterical German juvenile that gets stabbed by a woman. William Eythe did film THE EVE OF ST. MARK, but it was his third movie, after THE OX-BOW INCIDENT and SONG OF BERNADETTE.

Kingrat wrote: I always look at the billing as a snapshot of who was more prominent (or had the better agent!) at the time the film was made. Henry Fonda is billed below Dana Andrews in DAISY KENYON, which comes as a surprise. Ida Lupino is billed above Humphrey Bogart in HIGH SIERRA because she had made a big splash in THEY DRIVE BY NIGHT. Kingrat, DAISY KENYON was Fonda's last movie under contract under Fox, a pact he had com to loathe. At the time of release, he had successfully restablished himself after war duty, and had had a big hit the year before in MY DARLING CLEMENTNE. At the same time, Dana Andrews had become a star at Fox during WW2, along with William Eythe; unlike Eythe however, he was one of the few to remain big in the postwar period. It is debatable who the bigger name was in 1947, Fonda or Andrews (my guess is the latter), but the studio demoted him in the billing due to choosing not to re-sign with the studio. As for HIGH SIERRA, not only had Lupino made a splash in TDBN, but also in THE LIGHT THAT FAILED. Bogart, up until this role, hadn't clicked as a leading man, and was usually assigned villains and second leads; it was fortuitous for him that George Raft turned down HS, as well as THE MALTESE FALCON, which had Bogie hit stardom and cement it, respectively. So Lupino was the bigger name up until that point; in fact she vetoed Bogart as one of her costars in a subsequent movie (dont quite remember-think it was OUT OF THE FOG). So of course she got top billing here. Kingrat wrote: Martha O'Driscoll may have the most screen time of any actress in THE FALLEN SPARROW, but she's billed not only below the female star, Maureen O'Hara, but on the second page, whereas Patricia Morison is on the first page, though her character disappears after the first few scenes. Kingrat: O'Hara was of course the top female name here, and is reflected in the billing, notwithstanding the actual footage. O'Driscoll was one of many hopefuls who was consigned to featured roles in big films, and leads and second leads in progammers and Bs. Likewise the beautiful Patricia Morison, whose Hollywood career was a tragic waste. Also usually cast in featured roles and second leads, she was freelancing at this time, having recently been dropped by a clueless Paramount. If she had deleted scenes here, well she would experience worse. Her COMPLETE role was cut out by 20th in 1947's KISS OF DEATH, where she played Vitor Mature's wife who gases herself. Advance word was that she was worthy of an oscar. All that remained was mention of this, and a photo of her. Anyway, the billing reflects their current status in Hollywood.

William Eythe had solid roles in someof he studio's top films during WW2. Besides A ROYAL SCANDAL, these included THE OX-BOW INCIDENT, SONG OF BENADETTE, THE EVE OF ST. MARK, WILSON, A WING AND A PRAYER, TH HOUSE ON 92ND STREET, and CENTENNIAL SUMMER, among others. With the last role, he was fourth billed as his star started to wane; the war was over, and the studio's male stars were coming back to (hopefully) reclaim their stardom

A Royal Scandal came out in 1945. Maybe on re-release, Baxter's star was rising while Bankhead's star never really rose in films (not that she wasn't important but she never really clicked in films either.) I also think while Fox tried to make Eythe happen, he just didn't click. Could exolain the change in billing. Don't really know--just speculation. Helenbaby, This is substantially correct. In the case of A ROYAL SCANDAL, obviously top billing was given to Tallulah Bankhead. Not only was she a famous Broadway actress and personality, generally known by the public at large, but she had just scored a personal triumph the year before in a movie, Hitchcock' LIFEBOAT. While she may not have been nominated for an Oscar (one of the Academy's many unfortunate oversight), she won the New York Critic' Award for Best Actress in a movie. So at that moment, she was riding high with her second coming in Hollywood. William Eythe was one of Fox' brightest hopes as leading man, since most of the male stars with the studio were in the war (Tyrone Power, Henry Fonda, John Payne, George Montgomery, etc.). Unfortunately, as happened to most of the replacements, at every studio, he didn't remain at the top once the others came back. But in 1944 and 1945, he was being pushed for stardom, and so was given second billing. Anne Baxter, leading lady at the studio, was nominally one of their stars, but had yet to make it really big. The studio felt she would bolster the dubious boxoffice clout of the other stars, and so gave her the ingenue-second lead role. Likewise with Charles Coburn, a character actor well liked in Hollywood and by the public. He had just gotten a big boost in THE MORE THE MERRIER, where he won Best Supporting Actor. He was just as much of a draw, in the studio's eyes, as anyone else in the cast, and billed thus. Of course, things change. Tallulah returned to Broadway, Eythe faded, Baxter won the Best Supporting Oscar the following year for THE RAZOR'S EDGE, plus a nomination as Best Actress for ALL ABOUT EVE, at which point the studio considered her one of its major assets. So a re-release of ARS in the early 50s would probably have reflected the players' changed fortunes in the revised billing in the promotional materials.

yeah..he Vineland . . .guess its in the City of Industry, seems about right

I live minutes away from the last remaining drive-in in the Los Angeles area. As they were an integral part of my yout, I try to take nephews and nieces sometimes; and they enjoy the outdoor setting on balmy summer nights. Seems t me that most drive-ins in this area lasted well into the 80s.

On Wednesday, the guy suddenly decides to rob his own bank of a million dollars on Friday, with no planning, and he has to tell his wife, research a country to flee to, get two passports, 2 visas, airplane tickets, make arrangements for his kid's babysitter, pack his suitcases, steal the money and carry it out of the bank in a suitcase that weighs 115 pounds, catch the airplane at the LA airport, change planes in New Orleans, and be in Brazil by Saturday night. Fred, it's called pre-pre-pre 911.

Ginnyfan wrote: It was nice to see RO introducing the films and calling Ann a great friend to TCM and all, but couldn't the programmers have done a better job of getting Ann Rutherford movies that actually had a lot of Ann Rutherford in them. I admit that I was only in the house for two of them. One, WASHINGTON MELODRAMA, has Ann out of town for at least the first half hour. I DVRed it and I'm still waiting for her to show up again since her one early scene. Maybe she does something tremendous in the second half of the film to make it a worthy tribute film, but I'm just not seeing it. The other one, THIS TIME FOR KEEPS, I definitely had to see since it's part of what I've proclaimed to be TCM's SOG. And the film really fits under that designation. Ann has top billing, but the film is really about two things-Robert Sterling's relationship with father-in-law Guy Kibbee and how many capers Virginia Weidler could pull off in 73 minutes. OK, so I'm happy because I watched it for Weidler anyway. But it's supposed to be a starring vehicle for Ann and she's really no factor. This would be a good film if TCM actually did a Weidler tribute. Regardless of how one felt about the bumping of Sanders today, one must admit that there were some other films which might have shown Ann Rutherford's talents a little more than these. Topbilled wrote: I did record WASHINGTON MELODRAMA, which I rather liked (I regard it as a Frank Morgan vehicle, and it has a showy role for young Dan Dailey...they're the stars of it); and I recorded TWO O'CLOCK COURAGE. On the outside of the DVD sleeve, I wrote B Films with Ann Rutherford. That's what this tribute was. GF & TB: I recorded th titles WASHINGTON MELODRAMA and THIS TIME FOR KEEPS, but didn't get a chance to see them until this weekend. First of all, one needs to understand that Ann Rutherford was popular, but not officially ranked as a "star" by her studio; she was a featured player. This meant that she was usually cast in supporting or "featured" roles in big-budget A movies, and given leading lady roles in programmers and b-movies; which is what these tw movies were, respectvely. One of the studios' purposes in the more economy-minded features was to provide roles for as many of their featured-player contractees as possible, especially when a proposed series was contemplated-and many if not most, of a given studio's programmers and b-films were considered thus. They were also good testing grounds for new talent in fairly unrisky situations, whether in a bit like Ava Gardner's in TTFK, or in more substantial role, such as Dan Dailey (jr.)'s, in WM. So several featured players from the extensive MGM stock company got roles of varying importance in thsse two movies. In WASHINGTON MELODRAMA, we have Kent Taylor, Virginia Grey, Lee Bowman, and of course Ann and the aforementioned Dailey. Plus Frank Morgan, a character actor, but an important name, and a star of programmers at the studio, along with recent successes in the more prestigious THE WIZARD OF OZ and THE SHOP AROUND THE CORNER. So it was natural that he got top billing in the film. I had seen some of the film the evening of the tribute, and was dubious about the statement that Dailey one of the two stars of this (along with Morgan). So I timed each of the main performers' time on screen. In terms of screentime, Ann actually had the most, even with her absence formost of the first half hour, edging out Morgan. This was followed by the actual male lead, Kent Taylor, and then the villain, Dailey, who was also allowed his forte, a dance routine. Ann did get a showcase role, for it allowed her to show her versatility, with a decent French accent, as well as look glamorous in several scenes. All in all, a movie that accomplish all that its (modest) aspirations set out to do. Likewise THIS TIME FOR KEEPS. It also featured many of the studio's young hopefuls; besides Ann, there were Robert Sterling and Virginia Weidler, among others. Plus name character actors like Guy Kibbee and Irene Rich. in terms of actual screen time, Sterling actually go the most, followed by Ann, who edged out Weidler. and Kibbee a more distant fourth. Again Ann was absent for a good portion at the beginning, but this abence is what sets the plot in motion. If anything, this film was a showcase for Sterling and the rambunctious Weidler. But another modest entry that hit the marks it had to.

Topbilled wrote: I think these pictures do have to engage today's audience. If not, then they die when we die. At least a remake, which could be an advertisement for the original, will keep the story alive. Tb: Actually, these pictures DON'T engage the vast majority of today's audience, nor will they ever; only a very minute part of that group ever find their way to TCM on a regular basis. This is not passing any sort of judgement on this; it just is what it is. There is no need to remake the story; if you like it in its original fine, if not, no need to pander to different sensibilities. Impossible to remake every or even most classic movies, without even taking into consideration the aesthetics of such a drastic policy. When TCM sees a lessening in viewership, due to "they die when we die", I don't think ANYTHING will make modern audiences watch films that are already a half a century to nearly a century old. If TCM is still a going concern, it will most likely go the way of all worst fears here; i.e. more and more recent junk, even commercial breaks. If it remains intact, it will be as a sort beneficence bestowed on a minute viewership for a very esoteric channel.

I too enjoyed this movie on its own merits, of its time and place, and would never think about whether modern general audiences could get into it or not, and NEVER ponder the likelihood of a remake. That is why I tune into TCM, to enjoy the movies made during te classic Hollywood studio era, I know the vast majority of the films shown here would be considered unwatchable by younger audiences . . . that would not make me wanna watch any less. I do see most of the the new releases and can enjoy them, but my heart is here with longtime friends and scenarios.

I think most movies made during the studio era had end credits witht the cast list ONLY; this cast list was usually more complete than the initial credits, which usually only listed the main and featured players. However the opening cedits also listed some of the main personnel that worked on it, i.e. producer, director, art director, set designer, makeup, wardrobe, etc. The end credits may have been dropped when these films were sold for tv broadcast, in order to better fit into the designated time period. When things changed, in the late 60s-early 70s, is that now ALL the personnel started to be listed,at first for a minute or so at the end, eventually even every last boom dolly and caterer. The unions must've been responsible for this. While not a bad thing in itself IMHO, these credits run to ridiculous lengths....7 to 10 mins. When sneaking into another movie at a multiplex, I take this into account in determining which movies are doable lol,

For Lupino, just off the top of my head: HIGH SIERRA OUT OF THE FOG THE MAN I LOVE (yeah I know) DEEP VALLEY All good to great, IMHO, and all the better because of Ida.

*Cagney was given a succession of minor A (borderline quickies in the pre-code period that show him off marvelously, in my opinion, but he resented the cheap budgets and went on strike, going to First National for two years before Warners began creating the great star vehicles for him.* I believe he went to Grand National, or somesuch outfit. First National was aligned with WB. *Both Davis and Bogart got some of Warners best material, too, but ONLY after Jack Warner finally saw them for their talent. They both toiled (particularly Bogie) in lesser roles and films for a few years at the studio.* While this is mostly correct, I think that Jack Warner knew that they were talented all along. He just didn't know how to showcase them, and tossed them into anything that was available. Davis had to rebel and flee to England before he would give her roles commensurate with her talents. Bogie too got some oddball assignments; in his case he was the lucky recipient of George Raft's unwise turning down of several good scripts, which were made into great movies, AND which established the Bogart persona that finally made him a star, and eventually an icon. So Warner knew all along that they were talented, but only when he saw them for their moneymaking ability did they start to consistently receive some of the studio's best material. *And with those names (I could have added Robinson, Raft and Muni into the mix, as well) those were Warners' biggest stars pf the '30s and '40s, and look at the questionable treatment that some of them received.* It has been said that (paraphrasing here) MGM's stars were treated like royalty; WB's stars Toiled in the studio Factory. And of all the stars at WB, the one who hands down was treated worst of all was its biggest female star during most of the 30s: Kay Francis. In a dispute over salary during contract negotiations, she stirred up such bad blood (or downright vengeance) the Warners deliberately sabotaged her career. First they announce in the trade press (an unprecedented move) that she would be completing her contract doing B pictures. Vehicles bought for her were reassigned. They gave her terrible scripts with her dialogue full of "r's; she was known for her lisp. They broke her spirit, but carried on as if it didn't affect her. Really shabby treatment. *Virginia Mayo clearly had a star status lower than any of the above. You could compare her, I suppose, to Sheridan in the treatment that she received from WB.* Warner Brothers had the blessing, or the curse, of being topheavy with talented female stars. There was a definite hierarchy in the women's roles at WB. By the end of the 30s, with Francis' fall from grace, Bette Davis ruled the roost, and got first pick of all the plum roles. Leftovers were fought over by contractees, including Sheridan, Ida Lupino, Dehavilland, and later, Joan Crawford, Jane Wyman, Eleanor Parker, Patricia Neal and Viriginia, among others. Plus all those on short-term deals with the studio, including Miriam Hopkins, Mary Astor, Merle Oberon, Barbara Stanwyck. So it was tough for women stars to break through and maintain decent roles.

This is an enjoyable, colorful melodrama, with Taylor at the peak of her beauty. Hollywood was somewhat surprised, if not downright aghast, that Leigh had originally consented to star in what was considered a technicolored programmer.

*I think that Young was pushed up to "A" list by his stellar TV career.* I'm sure most agree that the likes of Grant, Bogart, Cagney, Fonda, Tracey, etc were *A grade actors, starring in their studios big budget films.* Finance, the thread specifically refers to their status as movie stars, not for any other medium.