Stephan55

Having watched only GET OUT and DUNKIRK thus far, I cannot make a comparative comment beyond those two. However I really "liked" (or rather was "shaken-up" a bit by) the plot premise and "who, what, and when" mystery style of GET OUT. And I found the "backward and forward" first person editing style to be well rendered and curiously effective in the historical epic DUNKIRK. I am thinking that the days of recognizable repeatable "stars" are getting further behind us, as there are fewer and fewer each passing year. Most of that I believe is the result of the demise of the big studio systems with their cliquishly vested "Star-Making" power.

ALSO AVAILABLE ON WATCH TCM ???? At the end of any "live" TCM broadcast when this "pops-up" with the TCM logo, it means (or it "used" to mean) that feature would also be available for ON-DEMAND later viewing/re-viewing. On the last day of this years 31 Days of Oscar (Saturday evening, March 3, 2018), TCM proudly aired the TCM premier of BRAVEHEART (1995). I hadn't seen this Mel Gibson epic in a number of years and so I stayed up and watched the TCM "live" broadcast. Because I know that TCM has infrequently made such "premiers" available for WATCH TCM ON-DEMAND, I also DVR'd it so I could re-watch again later. At the end of the movie, to my then pleasant surprise, the pale blue screen saying ALSO AVAILABLE ON WATCH TCM popped up! That was early Sunday morning. It is NOW early Tuesday morning and BRAVEHEART still hasn't shown up on the ON-DEMAND viewing list. In fact since last Saturday relatively few TCM broadcasts have (???) So, I am wondering, what happened with BRAVEHEART??? Did someone at TCM fall asleep at the wheel again??? On occasion TCM will NOT "advertise" at the end of a broadcast that a feature is ALSO AVAILABLE ON WATCH TCM and then it WILL happily show up on the ON-DEMAND list anyway??? Could it be that someone at TCM erroneously punched in that friendly little "Available" notice by "mistake"??? Of course only those of us actually watching a TCM "live" broadcast stream would be aware of such an announcement in the first place, which means that "we" were at least able to have caught the tail-end of any feature (if not the entire thing), and those just coming to TCM's ON-DEMAND playlist from either their PC or other device would never know that the feature NOT listed there was actually "advertised" that it would (or should) be. That is unless someone "told" them about it... ONLY those of us paying attention to both might actually catch such a "false" advertising "error" when it occurs. SO, In an effort to help keep TCM "honest" I decided to create this thread here, for "our" (the TCM viewers) benefit. I say that because I doubt that mentioning such a "notice" here will illicit any productive "forwarding" response from the Moderator, and certainly no acknowledgment of any kind from anyone at TCM. (But then again, "who knows" what miracles might actually happen in the future???) Since I only have one pair of eyes and limited time, I wish to enlist as many others who see this thread and whom are able to also monitor both TCM "live" broadcasts for that ALSO AVAILABLE ON WATCH TCM end of program notice AND counter check the ON-DEMAND playlist to see if whether or NOT the feature also actually shows up there??? AND then, When you catch such a repeat TCM "error" Please post your findings in a quick post in this thread. The NAME of the feature, AND the DAY (DATE) of its broadcast, is really all that I am asking for. However any additional comments/observations are also quite welcome. I am sincerely hoping that this is a "one-time" or (at most) a rarely occurring "event" with TCM. But now that I am explicitly aware that it happened, I would like for those of us who are concerned to "monitor" for any future such "events" so that we can make ourselves better aware if this is an area of broad common concern or not. Thank you.

Smart man.

If they only show his first "Star-making" picture A Time to Love and a Time to Die (1958) then I'll be content. And it's not like they haven't shown it once before (over a decade ago)...

Thanks Larry, the ones highlighted in GREEN are already on my "want-to-see" wait list. The couple in RED I've already seen and very much "enjoyed" (appreciated). The others I will add to my list. Thanks (for not making me look for those other threads "buried" in SPAM)

Back in the late evening of October 5, 2015, when Sansfin first created this thread, was the beginning of what now has sadly become routine here. It was the first massive SPAM attack experienced here. That first onslaught lasted well into the late morning hours of the following day before finally being "cleaned" up. Those (of the several of us) that were on-line at the time, were both bewildered and amused. Several threads were started, each with numerous posts and a "running" commentary, of which only this one remains. The others were deleted as "redundant" long before the Moderator (at that time) finally wised up and actually listened to our suggestions of "consolidating" like (similar) threads rather than delete them. Too bad we don't have some of those other threads to refer back to as there were quite a few very amusing observations and comments, as well as numerous "proactive" suggestions made on how to eliminate, prevent, curtail or at least limit the effects of such onslaughts. Of course NONE of those suggestions (even the simplest and more effective) were ever implemented by anyone in control here. The "new" member post monitoring and "Delays" suggested has been suggested before. I've seen it effectively implemented on a couple of the other sites that I occasionally visit, and while it doesn't prevent all Spam, it certainly curtails the BOT spam so prevalent here. But all of "our" suggestions are futile when addressing, deaf, blind, and dumb moderators who would rather "react" to such events than attempt to prevent or limit them. What I find really sad is I've seen some of these SPAM threads remain intact on these boards far longer than some of "our" own posts and threads here. Go figure...

Nope! But sure a lot of SPAM threads!!! When I pop in here and see pages and pages of SPAM, I seldom search for a "real" thread anymore. And even less contemplate creating one. I used to really get "into" the Oscar ceremonies, remember having "debates" with like minded friends about them, but that was years and years ago. The last couple of decades less and less. Way too many commercials, way too long, and far less of what I'm interested in seeing and hearing about. I remember when Brando and Scott kinda shook the Oscar world back when they shunned and politicized it... Maybe not the first time it happened, but kinda unusual at the time. That novelty has long since worn off. Seems kinda ironic to me that the more off-topic shenanigans they pull, trying to stretch this thing to the limit, then the more sponsors they require to pay for the additional time... more commercials, more time required for actual "content" and the longer and thinner it stretches. It's like a never ending downward spiral. Maybe it's always been that way, but to me the "ceremony" appears to be all about the "pre-party," the"party," and the "post" party, and very little about what the ceremony is supposed to celebrate: the "best" movies and persons that made them the "best" for the previous show year! (along with a memoriam tribute to the passing "greats" and "never" honored) Last night I turned it on, but after the first few sets of never ending sponsor promo's had to cut it off. I learned more about what happened in five minutes here than I could likely endure through two plus hours there. It was down to watching an old Anna May Wong picture that I'd never seen or the latest episode of "The Walking Dead." (Yeah, I'd rather watch zombies than the Oscars anymore...) I could only record one and watch another on my old DVR, and the Oscars didn't rate high enough. Call me jaded, call me unpatriotic (don't even get off on the 4th anymore, and I used to really love burning up money, er fireworks), but maybe that's part of getting old and turning into a grumpy old man. Anyway, yes I agree with the cause/s and call/s for change, and maybe I'll watch them again in another year.... maybe (probably) not. So thanks for the thread. If someone would just post all the winners in all the categories then my needs will have been met. I've seen a couple, and am on a wait list from my local library to watch all of the (now former) candidates (as has been my routine the last few years). So by this time next year I should be more in the know and ready to discuss about this years Oscar winners. If somebody cares to start such a belated thread at that time...

Figures I'd miss that historic event. Been busy spending the last hour or so say'n goodbye to "Carl." (another "historic" event, at least on TWD)

Gone? GONE???.... I must have blinked through that one. Okay, so which of you two wants to take "credit" for bringing the SPAM back?

The Moderator is too busy "policing" and censoring our "legitimate" threads than to be concerned about DELETING the overabundance of SPAM. It's a matter of priorties... And here, "we" long time posters are obviously considered to be a bigger threat and greater annoyance than SPAMMERS.

Haha, maybe... I think it would depend on where they are posting from. If they are located in the states the price goes up. If they're transmitting from outside North America and Western Europe, the prices are generally considerably less... South of the border, Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Africa, India, Asia, the Philippines, ...... the value of a human live "lessons" considerably. If one employs experienced "professionals" it is always more expensive than typical street thugs. But the risk of tracing makes the cost worth it to those who wish to remain anonymous.

Yeah, both of them But my preference lies with the German made G3 (heavier and farther reaching round, and very reliable & accurate combo). Back in my "survivalist" days I owned the semi-auto civilian model HK91. Fully decked with removable claw scope mount, bipod, the works. It was very "sweet" and extremely accurate with either the civilian .308 or NATO round. Wish I'd kept it as they are now quite rare and valuable (sale was banned in the US in '93). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_G3 http://www.notpurfect.com/main/hk91.htm In keeping with the thread, I used to know a few ex-military "mercenary" types back in the '70's and the value of an "average" life in the U.S. in those days was $5000. Much Less so in the "overseas" market. Of course higher value military and political targets were very expensive when contracting "professionals." No idea what the value of a "Spammer" might be today?

As Limey said (in another thread) we really do need a "Yikes" and perhaps a "Yuck" Reaction emoticon to better express ourselves on these boards.

Think about it.... .... ..... Well, what's "blah" to some is "Yah" to others...

If you're "confused" about what I'm talking about Speedy, you'll have to look it up. But please don't post any "Crotch-Less" images as this thread will go bye-bye too!

Been a long time fan of Garbo! (Now you know why)

OOOOOooooohhhHHHHH, Yes, yess, yeeessssss.... that's it!!! FYI opened toed socks (for those of us with foot fetishes) rank right up there with crotch-less panties.

Fortunately I've found it to be true regarding "what they say about women with big feet."

I see Moderator1 lurking around the boards... I wish that he (or she) would exercise that "itchy" DELETION finger of hers (or his) and take-out that slew of garbage SPAM threads that persistently overloads the GD forum!

Agree with what you say here Limey. I was a big fan of SNL when it was new and radical. But not so much of Bill Murray back then.... and for a long time after. I think he is an acquired taste. Perhaps like yourself, he "grew on me." But like a "mole" at the small of your back, I just never noticed it happening for a very long time. I think my revelatory moment was when I sat down and watched Groundhog Day (1993) for the umpteenth time, and found myself actually liking the guy! I mean it was just like the movie itself. I had this feeling that Murray was this sort of entertaining but obnoxious guy in real life, but actually transitioned into someone that was really likeable. And when I watched and listened to him in 'Under the Influence' and other interviews, he impressed me as someone who is intelligent, observant, and really unpretentious. Someone that I enjoy listening to, and would like to converse with. Whenever I watch Murray again in something that I long ago saw and didn't fully appreciate, it is with those new "seeing" eyes. And as far as Groundhog Day goes, it has to rank as not only my favorite Murray performance, but one of my all time favorite "feel gooders." What can I say. I really like the guy now, as a comedian, an actor, and as a person (but it didn't happen all at once).

What about his offbeat and incredibly entertaining Bunny Breckinridge in Ed Wood (1994). Or the role reversals with Bill as a tough guy underworld gangster vs Robert De Niro as a "good guy" cop in Mad Dog and Glory (1993). Even in his smaller parts such as Tootsie (1982) and Kingpin (1996) he is always such a stand-out character. And for a comedic actor the guy has range, I mean Murray as FDR in Hyde Park on Hudson (2012), but it worked (for me at least). I think he'd be a great host for the Oscars, TCM, ... practically anything! Too bad this is just wishful thinking here.

Ha Ha! Give me a little lady with big feet and I'm a happy man... (Little women make their feet look ever so much larger). But please keep those toe nails trimed and painted real purty-like, and No toe jam, please! So if you gals have an older sister who looks like a younger sister that fits that descrip. Just send me a PM with a picture of those purty little tiny big feet, wearin' different kinds of open toed socks and it'll be joy to world at my end!!! On second thought, better keep them photos to yourselves... at my age I do need to get a little sleep, and my imagination is bad enough without a picture. You gals do realize that I'm just pullin' your foot don't ya?

I think that they conducted several surveys in the defunct "Insider's Club" that gave them an idea this "Backlot" thing would fly. Well gents I do enjoy an occasional glass of wine. But it takes me a long time to finish a bottle, even with company, leave off a case of the stuff. And without proper recorking and storage good wine goes flat. So if I were legitimately informed that TCM were either going bust or forced to drop the commercial free aspect, and I could spare that by joining their damn Backlot, well, I'd probably be willing to spring that $87 per year fee just to keep them around as they are a while longer. But if that isn't the case, and it's just to make a little more profit for their CEO's and shareholders, I'd say screw-it, and just rely on my own archives for video entertainment. But like you say, the annoyance of their pushing wine and that damned club is a small additional price to pay if the alternative is commercial advertisements during their movies... or worse??? Ha Ha, funny, but not likely to happen... it's Not even close to an old promo offering a "dinner date" with Elvis, or Morgan Fairchild, or something I could get really excited about.

Well it's about time Speedy! I was beginning to think you were on vacation, or a second honeymoon or something! Those are all great titles Speedo, and I can well understand your feelings about Flynn's later movies. It is hard to watch anyone we love grow old and weary. And especially so when they appear to age so quickly before our eyes. We all "die at the end," Speedy. There are No exceptions to that rule. Unless you believe in the living rapture, no one ever gets out of here alive. But I do understand where you are coming from. I too read a good book slowly, because I want to delay that final chapter for as long as possible. And I don't enjoy watching any of those that I care about (least of all my screen heroes) age and pass away. If I could become a vampire and infect all that are meaningful to me with everlasting life, I would willingly do so. But when it comes to those I enjoy most on the silver screen, I cannot divorce myself from the knowledge that practically all of them have long been dead and buried. And those still with us soon will be. In as much as I dismay at watching my movie stars age from picture to picture, I want to fully enjoy them, from their earliest beginning, to that last final farewell role. I would love to see Flynn forever young, and I can watch those movies of his, from 1935-1945 over, and over again. But I feel I owe it to both of us to see the later Flynn as well. Watching him age and bloat, and knowing what I know about him, is not pleasant, but for me it is a necessity. Flynn is reported to have said, "I like my scotch old and my woman young." I wouldn't exactly call Flynn a pedophile, but undeniably he did have a predilection for young and beautiful, teenage girls. But as far as that goes I know of few adolescent boys and men (of any age) who would honestly deny the same. The age of marital consent did vary from state to state, but in California, a "legal" minor was still under the age of 18. Even consensual sex between teenage minors could be termed "statutory" rape (and esp. so if one of the partners was an adult). In California that was (and still is) deemed a criminal offense. The L.A. PD had it's own corrupt element at that time, not unlike what is revealed in the movie L.A. Confidential (1997). Studios paid "hush" money to prevent "bad" press from "leaking" and to keep their stars out of the public eye when they went astray. It seems that at the time Flynn was arrested Warner Bros. were in arrears and Flynn was an opportunity to teach them a lesson. That said, court transcripts reveal under cross examination by Flynn's own attorney, Jerry Giesler, that the girls likely did have intercourse with Errol and that it was consensual, and they were both under the age of 18 years at the time. Flynn was not one to ask for ID when a pretty girl desired to have her way with him, so he may in fact have been innocent as he claimed of having "knowing" carnal knowledge with a minor. But both girls were far from innocent themselves. The court allowed their "rap" sheet admissible as defaming evidence, and the jury (of 9 women and 3 men) who undoubtedly were much enamored with Flynn themselves, could not find him guilty in any case and he was acquitted on all counts. Technically guilty, but proven innocent under a court of law, the term "In Like Flynn" was born. Aside from Lili Damita, Flynn's two other wives were notably much younger than himself. At the time of Flynn's trial an 18 year old future starlet from Mexico was illegally residing at Flynn's house. Long before she became the wife of Tyrone Power, and before Errol provided her famous screen name, Linda Christian was an "undocumented immigrant" and Flynn's teenage lover. Had the jury been privy to this information Flynn's acquittal might not have been so certain. Immediately after his acquittal and while still in the courthouse, Flynn began a flirtatious romance with an 18 year old girl working there. His soon to be second wife Nora Eddington was the daughter of a Los Angeles County Sheriff's Deputy. Flynn reportedly made sure to check Nora's ID before taking that relationship to bed. At the time of Flynn's death, 17 year old Beverly Aadland, was at the end of a long line of teen queens that shared his bed. And Beverly later admitted that she was only 15 when Errol first swept her off her feet. It is procreatively physiologically normal for both men and women to be physically attracted to those in their most unblemished physical prime. Many teens, including Errol had their first sexual experience as an adolescent. And some of those, from both sexes, never out grow the desire to relive or recapture that first impressionable experience. Just as in 1942, in today's society such unrestrained activities can get one into trouble. Whether that is why Errol's roving eye often strayed to such younger women is conjecture. However he did reportedly confide to those that were closest to him that it was a compulsion. And also stated that "with young girls he didn't have to listen to what they said, because they never had much meaningful to say." Errol was undeniably a womanizer. But one that didn't have to work at it. For Flynn, the women came to him, and apparently gave of themselves willingly. It was a long time before I could allow myself to watch anyone portray my favorite actors on the screen. But I now find that I am able to do so, and when the performance is well done, I've discovered that I actually enjoy it. I've not yet seen The Last of Robin Hood but am looking forward to doing so. Kevin Kline is a fine actor, and from what I've read and seen about the movie he plays Flynn believably and well. Nothing factual in the movie will likely shock me. For as much as I do not like knowing and observing the results of Flynn's self-destructive behavior, I cannot bring myself to judge or condemn the man, as in some ways that would be like judging and condemning myself. But it has taken me many years to reach that point in my life, so I can well understand your hesitancy. Especially since you have shared that you have only recently discovered Flynn, and are still well within that nuptial period that I first experienced so long ago. http://allthingscrimeblog.com/2015/02/09/how-errol-flynn-hollywoods-bad-boy-beat-his-rape-charges-7/ Ha ha, jealous type is he. And over a man that's been long gone for going on 59 years.... So this thread must be like a "guilty" little secret pleasure for you, hmmmm.... I think that thought makes Flynn smile from wherever he may be.... Okay, so I'm still waiting for you to share your impressionable thoughts on Flynn's son, Sean???

Looking Thenryb, but can't find anything specific yet. Flynn is always mentioned as one of Belli's cases, and that they had a "lasting" friendship. But Belli was such a "colorful" figure in his own right, with so many controversial clients and cases, that I think Flynn gets a little overshadowed. Melvin Mouron Belli (July 29, 1907–July 9, 1996) A prominent American lawyer known as "The King of Torts" and by insurance companies as "Melvin Bellicose." He had many celebrity clients, including Zsa Zsa Gabor, Errol Flynn, Chuck Berry, Muhammad Ali, The Rolling Stones, Jim Bakker and Tammy Faye Bakker, Martha Mitchell, Maureen Connolly, Lana Turner, Tony Curtis, and Mae West... ... ... ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melvin_Belli In 1980, author Charles Higham wrote a controversial biography, Errol Flynn: The Untold Story, alleging that Flynn was a fascist sympathiser who spied for the Nazis before and during the Second World War, and that he was bisexual and had multiple gay affairs. (all unsubstantiated allegations) In 1981, Flynn's daughters, Rory and Deirdre, hired Melvin Belli to sue Higham and his publisher Doubleday for libel. The suit was dismissed on the grounds that a deceased person cannot, by definition, be libeled. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Errol_Flynn Melvin Belli - IMDB http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0068956/bio Melvin M. Belli, a Biography http://www.bellisociety.org/about-mel/ Melvin (the King of Torts) Belli Was the Knave of Hearts Until Lia Triff Became His Fifth Queen (March 03, 1980) http://people.com/archive/melvin-the-king-of-torts-belli-was-the-knave-of-hearts-until-lia-triff-became-his-fifth-queen-vol-13-no-9/ Melvin Belli Dies at 88; Flamboyant Lawyer Relished His Role as Kingof Torts (July 11, 1996) http://www.nytimes.com/1996/07/11/us/melvin-belli-dies-at-88-flamboyant-lawyer-relished-his-role-as-kingof-torts.html Obituaries: Melvin Belli (Wednesday 10 July 1996) http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/obituaries-melvin-belli-1328201.html http://www.theerrolflynnblog.com/2007/11/22/errol-flynn-the-law-books-magazines-press-photos/