darkblue

It is most definitely not a sequel in any way, shape or form. It was just titled that to cash in on the popularity of 'Valley of the Dolls', which was a blockbuster hit. And it worked! Russ Meyer, who made a lot of money making low-budget, often soft-porny, and always thoroughly silly movies that featured large-breasted women made a fortune with 'Beyond'. But it wasn't just because of the title, though that did account for most of the initial audience. Word of mouth about what a delightfully outrageous movie it was got around and brought in many "alternative movie" fans. And it wasn't rated X. It was rated R. It's not porn, it's just a wild, sleazy romp in which a guy's head gets cut off (spoiler!).

Just watched him in Sam Peckinpah's 'Cross of Iron' (1977) the other night. Your appraisal of that quality to Mason is astute.

Recorded it for my DVD collection. I read the book in '67 after my gf handed it to me and said "read it". Liked it. I was 17. 6 of us (3 couples) went all the way downtown to see it during its run (with theatres in every neighborhood back then, going to one of the downtown palaces was a "special outing"). 1967. Maybe the most wonderful year ever for movies.

Of course you did. You're so young.

Can't make it any clearer - unless it's names you're looking for. Get more sleep, maybe.

They were indeed. Somebody has issues of jealousy about another member - apparently a couple of people agreed with that member rather than the jealous one - and it was the impetus for jealous-one's posting of desultory and unjustifiable descriptions of the member with whom more people seemed to be in agreement. So, rather than policing the thread any longer, moderator shut it down. Not that bad a call, actually.

Hmmm. Apparently we're not permitted to acknowledge the phenomenon of **** fantasies in this forum. I know that many women have, or have had, such fantasies. I would think that rugged types like Sean Connery (James Bond!) would be prime material for such. As for 'Marnie', I have no opinion about whatever was in that movie because I don't remember any of it.

Wasn't she already "traumatized"? Truth, I haven't watched it since I was 15 years old. I was so bored back then that my mind kept wandering away. I've not gotten around to wanting to re-watch it yet. One of these days.

Maybe you could stamp your foot then....?

What would a lesbian do with a mollusk? Oh....you said thespian. Nevermind.

Concentration? Password? Who Do You Trust??

Warren fans, take note. There's yet another TCM offering of Oates' work on Friday morning 6 am. 'Crooks and Coronets' (1969). I've never seen this one - better get the recorder warmed up.

Except that for quite a long time after the upgrade the moderation was really quite moderate - permitting us to use many words and expressions and even co-operating at removing words from the filter at our request. The word for a female dog was allowed that way by direct moderator action to make it so (now reversed), and work-arounds, such as placing a ! for an i were tolerated for a long time. And a word like s*** (just like that - appropriate asterisks) was not removed. We were almost permitted to speak like adults around here. All that changed about 6 or 8 weeks ago. It's being denied - and "political" topics are being dangled out there as the reason for the perception of change (rather than admitting what the true reason is). Someone, for some reason, said something to someone about the moderating of these forums. They are being far more heavily policed now than they were before.

Sure, make my recommendation of 'Strange Days' a "theory". Make up some "rule" about 2nd viewings while you're at it, why don'tcha? Not always easy to tell where you're coming from, oh french one.

Well, I could see a movie differently a single day apart watching it. A lot depends on how I'm feeling, what's on my mind, my momentary emotional state, level of restlessness or contentment, whether I'm tired or well-rested - who knows how many factors can influence how we receive a movie at one time or another? That's why I watch almost everything I do at least twice. The second time is often the more appreciative viewing.

'Strange Days' (1995) The one time I saw this before - on pay tv back in the 90's - it seemed a little excessive to me. Over the top. Fun but not quite believable. This time it didn't feel that way at all. This is a stimulating movie from maverick director Kathryn Bigelow that has gotten better over the 20 years since it was released. Turns out, this smartly-premised, socially-conscious film was pretty darn prophetic (and still is). Sci-Fi action-drama with an exquisite performance by Ralph Fiennes - best I've ever seen him. Not to everyone's taste perhaps - but it's got my recommendation, that's for sure.

I just assumed it was "Curious Mind".

Oh, I understood them as well. That was not gonna be my question to you (did you understand the answers?)

In the past, perhaps. Michael may have allowed some discussion of that nature. Not like that any more.

Just curious, did you think those answers....... Uh, nevermind. I keep forgetting about the thin ice.

Excellent movie - inspired by the phenomenon of "bystander apathy" incidents in New York back in the 60's. TCM showed it many years ago. I'd give almost anything for them to show it again. Before Robert De Niro, there was Tony Musante. He was a fine actor who should've become more famous.

Reform school? Boy, are you ever showing your age.

Kinda surprised we're allowed to use it - I'd think the filter would've decided it was as bad a word as **** That's "couth" with the "un" in front, in case you were wondering.

We're not allowed to comment on what the moderator does - that's why your post was deleted. At least misswonderly's was only shut down - which is almost the same as being deleted, except it takes a couple of extra days for it to sink from sight, rather than being ripped out all at once.