Stephen444

>I will say it's refreshing to see someone defend Brando/Dean, That's all I was ranting about. I find very few films and actors today that really hold my interest. As I said before in regard to this thread my criticism of the Coen Bros. is based on the fact that I think their films are well worth seeing and discussing. Message was edited by: Stephen444

I looked at the online promo for this film, which didn't hold my attention. Coming attractions can be deceiving. Remember Mary Riely? Looked great in the promo but uugh, what a stinker. Anyway I have always felt that if you can't even make the promo interesting there isn't going to be much there. Remakes are usually disappointing and unfortunately this is the one genre that many contemporary films are based on. I think the remake of this film has a high bar to overcome to come close to the original. From what I observed in the promo the characters appear to be glib but without glamour. I think this remake would have worked much better on the small screen as a variation of Sex in the City but with only women in the cast. Then they could have dragged the campy dialogue on endlessly, week after week. TV does this very well.

>Come to think of it, Clooney has done some interesting stuff, too, although I believe he's more of the classic leading man. Brad Pitt is so much more "boyish good looks". I sometimes wonder how James Dean would have made out had he lived. Maybe the same. After all, Jett Rink was a character role, right? I can't believe you are comparing George Clooney and Brad Pitt to the likes of James Dean and Marlon Brando. I don't think that Clooney or Pitt have anything on their resumes that is close to the groundbreaking films of On the Waterfront, Streetcar, Wild One, Rebel w/o a Cause, East of Eden.

>That would be the best actor to ever become president How about Bill Clinton in Hollywood? Then we would have the Best President in the movies!

>I think a so-so Coen Bros. movie is almost guaranteed to be far more entertaining than the average Hollywood movie that's got nothing but marketing going for it. Agreed! I am making my comments about the Coen Brothers because I think their films are interesting and worth discussing. Today's films are judged in the media by how much money they make. When movies are discussed it is usually about how much money they make. Like in Spaceballs when Mel Brooks refers to merchandising..now that's where the real money is!

Ronald Reagan.

>mho, it's one of the smartest thing filmmakers can do - try different genres and different types of movies, instead of getting stuck doing the same kind of thing over and over, often with diminishing returns. Yeah, well I'm glad Hitchcock did the same thing over and over again. He use to refer to that which motivated the characters in his movies the Mcguffin. He didn't think that this was too important it was just the particular circumstances that caused people to act (no pun intended) the way they did in his movies. I think that Fargo possesses this element. I can follow the motivation of the characters but I really couldn't empathize with the characters in Burn After Reading. There was humor but no interesting mcguffins organizing and motivating their actions.

One bright spot in the movie was Brad Pitt. I never really thought much about his abilities other then his celebrity but I was impressed with his style in this movie. I think he delivered some of the funniest lines and created an interesting character. Unfortunately the lack of disturbing horror to balance the humor was sadly lacking.

"Every time I here these lines they send a shiver up my spine." That's what Fargo achieved that Burn After Reading doesn't. There is horror like in Fargo, people being murdered, but in the case of Burn After Reading even the murders got laughs in the theater. I don't feel that the story (writing) was in the same league with the Hitchcock styled Fargo.

Hey, Nashville is a great film. In my opinion, one of this countries best but how many times is tcm going to show this film this year? What about some of Altman's other films. The man produced alot of work....Mash, Brewster McClould, McCabe & Mrs. Miller, Images etc....etc. I think his work deserves more of a look then tcm is giving us.

TCM is so obsessed with packaging there offerings thematically I find it surprising that Labor Day isn't addressed today. The two films that come to my mind are Picnic and On The Waterfront. I realize that these were just shown but maybe saving them for today would have been a more interesting, thought provoking connection then just showing them on nights that were tributes to Rosalind Russell and Marlon Brando. What other films relate to Labor Day??

I also love this film. It's got something for everyone. Christmas, love, model trains and of course Janet Leigh's frontal attributes. I wonder if Howard Hughes had anything to do with it's design as he did with Jane Russell's.

This is one of my favorite films. Everyone is cast perfectly for this film. I thought it was interesting to hear Robert Osborne remark that the lead part was suppose to go to Frank Sinatra but the producer discovered that that he could get Brando and went with him. I don't think that Sinatra could have come close to the strength that Brando brought to the part. Putting politics aside (Kazan fingering actors for Un-American activities) he did produce some of the most creative film ever made (On the Waterfront, Streetcar Named Desire, East of Eden).

>The "continuing story" concept is something TV does well. It was effective in HILL STREET BLUES I don't know but I could always watch individual episodes of Hill St. Blues as well as St. Elsewhere, All Creatures Great and Small and Upstairs Downstairs. The crucial element in these productions was good writing which seems to be sadly lacking in many continuing story efforts today.

>Dude, how did you do that chart so that it shows up on the Board? I'm no tecky but I figured it out from posts on the _General Issues Forum_ I made the diagram in a software program called Inspiration.

Yes, I enjoyed making it. I'm a visually oriented person and it helped me get a handle on many of the actresses that I was not familiar with that were discussed.

I limited the diagram to actresses that were the right age in 1950. As I said earlier in this post, I can certainly see a young Joan Crawford or Bette Davis in Eve's part.

A summary of all the actresses discussed here...hope this works

The ending of John Waters "Pink Flamingos". By far the most repulsive acts ever filmed made even more disgusting because it was real.

The wrestling scene in Women in Love is my favorite part of the whole damn movie! I LOVE seeing Bill Sykes (Oliver!) **** as a jay bird! I don't consider myself homophobic but I would have to say that most guys feel a little uneasy watching it. Other examples... Endings to "They Shoot Horses Don't They" and "Looking For Mr. Goodbar". Both excellent films but disturbing. Of course most artists would feel good to hear that there work is found to be disturbing.

Wrestling scene between Oliver Reed and Alan Bates in "Women In Love"

I think the thread started out and is mostly about realistic options to the part of Eve but I also enjoy comparing actors of different generations which is what I was referring to in the case of a youthful Joan Crawford and Bette Davis. Sort of like comparing athletes of different times. Liz Taylor was probably just a little too young in 50 but then she was only 34 when she played "Martha" in "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf". Everyone's comments are very interesting. There is obviously a great deal of knowledge to be absorbed on this forum regarding the history of film.

Arturo wrote: "As for other choices mentioned here: Joan Crawford???? She was the age of Margot. " I meant a 24 year old Joan Crawford. I was making a comment about her uniquely strong camera presence. In her prime, she or Betty Davis would have been perfect for the part. I don't think any of these other ladies could have touched them.

tikisoo wrote..."why are so many people afraid to admit they moved by sentimental stories?" I didn't say Picnic is sentimental in the sense that it's milking us for emotion. I hate that kind of sentimentality. I think there are sentimental elements in the movie but it is saved by the strong emotions communicated in the story and by the exceptional performances. Yes, as I grow older I find myself more open to films of the past that could be described as corny. I think there many films to be learned from and experienced. I especially like to think about the time that the film was created in and to think about how the elements of a movie are effected by the standards and customs of that time. Message was edited by: Stephen444

I liked everyone in this movie, especially Rosalind Russell. I think everyone complimented each others personality. Some of the lines may be corny but this was made in 1955, what do you expect? Yes some of the writing comes off as corny but I think that it is interesting and full of emotion.