darkblue
-
Posts
22,191 -
Joined
-
Days Won
38
Posts posted by darkblue
-
-
That's not very polite. I thought we were all about politeness on this board?
You know who else thinks it should be all about politeness on this board?
Hitler.
-
I think there is harm anytime a work of art disappears and the general public isn't given an option as to if they wish to view said art or not.
Therefore, while I understand certain stereotypes and works are offensive to certain folks, I don't feel that justifies removing said works from the general public.
So, you don't feel that anything should go out-of-print? Ever?
I can't tell you how many records have failed to make it to cd to my dismay. And movies that have not gotten a home video release. Books and magazines that are no longer in print. While I do agree with you that I'd love to have everything available to me, someone has to manufacture it for my consumption - at their expense. If there are not enough potential consumers to justify the investment, then we are left with what we have - the existing productions.
Sometimes something simply goes out of style, to a point where the manufacturer no longer feels it's wise to invest in newly-produced inventory. That leaves us with fewer (and usually more expensive) options for acquiring the item, but it's not like it's been removed from the earth - lost to some film/record/book-burning fanatics.
Everything that exists is still available for new edition-ing - it just requires someone who's willing to spend the necessary money to make it happen. But if it's not worth it to anyone with the necessary money, what can we do? We can make it happen ourselves or we can go hunting for already existing editions.
-
Best not to read their posts, TB. The TCM flag wavers have always, do now, and always will praise every move TCM makes......the flag wavers will scream and writhe on the floor, mouths afoam, when the brilliant suggestion of a TCM Classic channel is proposed
Now, that's what I call a personal insult! No namby-pamby statements of truth that Topper calls "rude" 'cause he doesn't like them - you've got the real goods, primo!
-
She & Him
-
Yeah, good point, dark.
But NOW you're forgettin' what it says in Lillian's IMDb's bio of her, and I quote...kind'a...
"D.W. Griffith reportedly discovered Lillian Gish while attending a 1913 women's Flyweight Division boxing match in which the diminutive Gish(weighing in at 103 pounds and with a 23 inch reach) defeated Martha "The Mangler" Mancini in an 11th round TKO."
(...and so, like I was sayin' here........)
I still think Richard could take her. Martha too.
-
HEY now folks! Let us not forget here that Lillian could be one tough old broad when she had to be!
I mean, she DID take on Bob Mitchum once and came out on top.
Well, if she uses a gun against Richard, then I suppose she could take him. Anyone can take anyone under that circumstance.
-
seriously though, Richard Chamberlain couldn't even take Lillian Gish in a fight.
Could so.
-
Movies cannot necessarily stand on their own, as opposed to art, movies require multiple talents from large and varied skill sources while art, either painting, sculpture, music or writing is the result of one artist.
I disagree. It doesn't matter how many people are involved in making a movie - how many artists it takes to create the work.
The finished work is the art piece - it stands as is, on its own. If it doesn't garner appreciation, that doesn't stop it from being a finished piece of art - it just makes it an unappreciated piece of art.
-
Having the lady of the house to order Lizzie to clean all the windows while its 104 degrees could bring a person to murder.
It could indeed.
But, she was acquitted - was she not?
-
I especially liked him in Day of the Dolphin and Petulia, maybe not two of his best known movies.
Speaking of lesser-known, one of his very best performances was in the Canadian movie, 'The Changeling' in 1980. He didn't appear in much horror fare, but he did a great job in that one.
-
1
-
-
To me Scott was by far the most believable character in The Hustler. Not his "biggest" role by a long shot, but one of his best.
He excelled at playing hard men with a seething interior. He seemed made for that - and in almost all his roles he couldn't quite hide it, even when it wasn't called for.
'Hardcore' (1979) was a good one for his oeuvre.
Also good in 'The Last Run' (1971). 'The New Centurions' (1972) was an excellent film for him wherein he got to appear marginally less angry.
Frankly, considering these titles plus some oddball stuff like 'The Savage Is Loose', 'Rage', 'Firestarter' and 'The Formula', it would seem that Scott was quite a peculiar film personage. Unique.
-
Yes, people are funny, but in this specific case everybody is funny. i.e. ",,,suddenly everybody changes their tune,,,"
Of course I do understand that most of the time when people use words like 'all' or 'everybody' they really don't mean that in a literal sense.
You're a very understanding person, james.
-
For me, EVERY movie stands or does not stand depending on whether I think it's good or not.
If I'm thinking about matters apart from what's on the screen, it's probably not a very good movie and therefore it does NOT stand on its own.
-
Quitting alcohol can kill you? How so?
The detoxification (known colloquially as the DT's) can cause severe hallucinations and unsafe reactions to them.
-
Speaking of the Jewish experience in the USA and elsewhere, has anybody noticed how, when the Jews are victims of persecution, they are universally pitied and admired, and everybody is ready to chant the mantra NEVER AGAIN! NEVER AGAIN!--but when they defend themselves and beat up their many persecutors, suddenly everybody changes their tune and starts accusing the Jews of behaving like modern day Nazis?
People are funny.
-
Oh yeah! I remember seein' this aftermath of your violent post-it spree on the evening news a while back, didn't I dark???...
(...oh the humanity!!!)
Poor bastard never saw it comin'.
-
I went post-it once. That was pretty intense.
-
(...though maybe because it seems the coworker in question here is female, and thus a gender far less inclined TO "go postal" than are males, maybe this is what's throwin' ya here in regard to gettin' DGF's joke)
Right. Maybe if she went for a cross-country drive wearing a diaper we'd have a clearer idea.
-
Not sure I understand the question. Are you referring to a movie that's about something historical (like the battle of the Alamo; or the French Revolution; or the 1919 BlackSox scandal) - or just any movie at all?
-
Not ever having seen this co-worker, I can't say for sure if such a thing is possible or not. Of course, I STILL know women who, when they were mere teen agers, thought they'd travel to England one day and sweep PAUL McCARTNEY off his feet!
Never thought much of the Beatles' taste in women.
Ringo probably had the best.
-
this thread .......... will now be shut down. Oh well. I felt it had run out of steam days ago anyhow!
Absolutely. Today's slippage into the farcical is a sure sign that what can be said about the parlance to an 'actor or actress' word-choice has been exhausted. We've now entered silly city.
Shut 'er down and spare us our selves, oh moderator fair!
-
I view your POV just as extreme as the person you are having a debate with here. I didn't say gender has NO influence on behavior/needs of any kind. I said that "I try to view gender only as a biological construct'. Big diference there but since you often fail to understand anything that is nuanced, I'm sure it passed you by.
Now, james - I see no reason to be so critical of roverrock's attempt at humour. Why should hepclassic be the only member making hilarious statements today?
-
1
-
-
Perhaps every baby just needs to be treated hormonally from birth so that both are in perfect lifelong balance and we will have the perfect robotic egalitarian unisex world where "females" and "males" are completely in tune. "Males" should also be given additional drugs to diminish any size/strength capacities and "females" should be given additional drugs to enhance their size/strength capacities.
But that would be "science" and, as hepclassic has so perfectly pointed out, "science" is a paternal construct.
Her suggestion is that nothing be done at all so that chemical differences between male and female persons be eliminated naturally. Males would automatically and naturally develop more female hormones (and possibly a womb), if only social constructs were to be eliminated from life. Makes perfect sense to me.
-
Well, "she" told me she was of the opposite sex, but I haven't yet had the opportunity to verify it.
In Philadelphia, one must be particularly careful about these matters. It's been said that there is an inordinate amount of cross-dressing in that city.
Does the history behind a movie matter or should it stand on its own?
in General Discussions
Posted
Even if they did need to be autistic to do it.