sewhite2000

Maybe if you call it the Dude, Where's My (Nice) Car? thread, the mods will think it's movie-related, and restore it?

Boy, it was all championed with maybe too long an ad campaign during all the MeToo and inclusion/diversity momentum. It made the cover of Time magazine in December, I think. The novel is back out front and center everywhere books are sold, which I suppose I don't mind, but of course with pictures of the movie cast on the cover, which will now be the vision the newest generations have of the story for the next 20 years. Of course, ABC, owned by Disney, ran a promo during the Oscars. Wrong for me to judge a movie from a two-minute trailer, I suppose, but it feels like its purpose is to promote Girl Empowerment and Believing in Your Own Awesomeness more so than faithfully representing the novel. Just the fact that the central hero of the novel in 1962 was a girl was startling enough, I think, but now Oprah-Disney appear to feel a need to ramp up the Girl Power factor a lot more, to the point where Charles Wallace and Calvin almost aren't even seen in the trailer. And there seems to be way too much of the father. In the book, you don't even know if he's alive until three-quarters of the way in. The trailer makes it look like he's going to be a major character. Not sure how they're going to work that in. Flashbacks, maybe. I know, you get Chris Pine to be in your movie, you want to use him, but still... I still think there's a great movie to be made from the novel, but it looks like this isn't it.

This was my favorite childhood novel, and I'm pretty distressed by the trailers that make the film adaptation look way too clean, way too in glorious Technicolor and just way too Disney than the mysterious, atmospheric story I remember. The three "Mrs." characters now appearing to resemble a cosmic version of Destiny's Child? Meh.

Oh, Lord, it's starting again ...

I hadn't looked at the boards in a couple of days while the spam was just out of control, and so hadn't refreshed the screen in a while. I clicked on your thread, which was still on my antiquated screen, to see what was up, and got a "Sorry, we can't find what you were looking for!" message which I have never seen before in all my years on this board. And then of course when I punched up a refreshed Page One of General Discussions, it was no longer there.I just assumed at the time that it had been moved to off-topic chit-chat. But it certainly seems wrong for it to have been deleted altogether. Even if somebody started some crazy screed, it seems like just those posts could have been deleted.

As I was attempting to go to sleep, I was struck by a memory of a dialogue exchange in the movie Broadcast News. William Hurt's character doesn't just want to be a news reader guy; he wants to develop his own stories. And producer Holly Hunter says okay, well what have you got? And he says you'll take it seriously. You won't just dismiss it out of hand? And she sighs as if he she can't believe he thinks this of her and says yes, yes, I'll take it seriously. And he says when a woman is sexually assaulted by someone she knows. And her reply is something like "BLECCCHHHH!!!" And he gets a look on his face like a hurt puppy, and she immediately says, sorry, sorry, go ahead. Now the whole joke of that sequence is maybe supposed to be more about the personality of those two characters - that despite her promise to the contrary, she can't help but express her initial reaction to something with her entire body. But I think it was also at least a secondhand "joke", if that's the right word, about the subject matter, which in the cynical America of 1987 seemed, hard as it may be to believe now, trite and too sentimental to be considered "hard news", as if, you know, we had other, more serious things to worry about. And it got a big laugh when I saw it in the theater in 1987. The Albert Brooks character has a similar reaction to the subject matter a little later on the movie, and that also got a laugh. Although to be fair, it is then played for empathy when we see Hurt's finished piece (though his contrivance of inserting a shot of himself tearing up later turns out to be a major plot device). Also kind of interesting in the movie it's a man who wants to do a story about this subject that a woman doesn't really find newsworthy. Anyway, jump forward 30 years, and things as a culture we have shifted where no news organization is going to dismiss a date rape allegation. Potential ratings are too good! Certainly a good thing that the issue is getting more attention, but is it also a bad thing in that it often feels like a more exploitative, gotcha sort of issue in which the accusation pretty much always seems to be more important than any proof or any other follow-up? Sorry if this is veering the thread way into off-topic territory. I included the Broadcast News example to try to keep it movie-relevant. It also makes me think of Absence of Malice when Paul Newman asks, "What do you do when they conclude an investigation, and the guy is innocent?", and Sally Field has to respond, "Well, they never tell us when they conclude an investigation."

This would not be comedy to several people I went to high school with, who as far as I can tell, spend their entire lives on Facebook saying how everything bad that has ever happened to America is Obama's fault, even everything bad that's happened since he left office.

Okay, well that says her daughter-in-law provided the revelation, not an "author friend". But still interesting. Despite the close connection, that's one person providing unconfirmed hearsay 80 years after the fact. I'm uncertain how to feel about that. I certainly didn't know Young's son was in Moby Grape!

Well, this thread got very political and all over the map since I last checked in. I'm just going to comment on High Noon as a movie and not what political and social ramifications it has or what the definition of a hero is or anything so profound. Having watched it just now for the first time in a few years, I was struck by what busybodies everyone in the town is. Everybody knows everything about everybody else. Maybe that was true in the small town Old West. But this particular town struck me in this viewing as really inauthentic: it's big or small as it needs to be in any given scene. I don't know where all the dozens and dozens of people we see in the church and the saloon combined live, based on how tiny everything looks in the exteriors. Maybe they're all off on farms in the outskirts somewhere? And what's with the church and the saloon being open at the same time? There wasn't some Bible-thumping contingent putting the kibosh on that kind of sinfulness? I mean, bars aren't open in America at 10:30 on a Sunday morning even in 2018! It had to be a Sunday, right? Although I don't know if it's ever said. Certainly nobody seems to have to go to work.

Certainly the first time I've heard of this Clark Gable date rape accusation. I feel like this would come as news to Robert Osborne, who always described it as an on-set "fling" or "affair". Could you provide the name of this author friend so I might be able to do some online research on my own?

I've been a longtime lurker on these threads, but I've never voted before! I think I've always been a little nervous that there might be few enough votes, that mine might actually have an impact! But all the hard work you folks put in, my gosh, the least I can do is show my appreciation by casting a vote. I've often toyed with the idea of designing a schedule of my own. Once I even played around with formatting one, but I gave up after about half an hour, seeing how hard it actually was. So, all six of you who put schedules together this time, you definitely have my appreciation! I loved all the schedules, but I cast my vote for the schedule submitted by Speedracer5. It had the most movies I would want to watch. Charles Coburn! That spaceship movie lineup! Those desert island movies! Those Paris movies! Yes, that's my pick.

A recurring theme of the issue seemed to be lost or stolen Oscars, or Oscars whose present location could only be vaguely guessed at. And with the temporary theft of Frances McDormand's Oscar, it just goes on!

I'm late posting this, because I think this is the last day it will be on the stands, but I hope some of you caught Entertainment Weekly's issue that came out before the Oscars, as it has a lot to appeal to classic movie fans. On the occasion of Oscar's 90th anniversary, EW devoted a lot of articles to elements of Oscar history. Granted, the maximum length of any of these "articles" was two pages, so a lot of them were more like blurbs. But I enjoyed them. Moving more or less in chronological order, there were articles on: The First Oscar Night How Oscar Got Its Name Luise Rainer, "The First Meryl Streep" (Well, that was a bit of an exaggeration, but a nice recap of her life and career) Mrs. Miniver Hattie McDaniel (this article curiously seemed to want to imply her career went into a tailspin after Gone With the Wind, but I disagree - she just kept right on doing what she'd always done) Julie Andrews, Audrey Hepburn, Marnie Nixon and My Fair Lady Haley Mills, the final recipient of the Academy's special juvenile award Jacques Cousteau, Three-Time Oscar-Winner?!!? Gloria Grahame Miyoshi Umeki How did Sidney Poitier not get a Best Actor nomination in 1967 when he was in two Best Picture nominees (and one winner) and another film that was among the 10 highest-grossing of the year? Jane Fonda comments on all her nominated performances The Oscar streaker and what happened to him Titanic James L. Brooks Kevin Kline's surprise win for a comedic performance The "Stars of Tomorrow" number at the ceremony for the 1988 nominations (though I know I watched this - I distinctly remember Rob Lowe doing a CCR number with Snow White and Dustin Hoffman's acceptance speech - I have completely forgotten this number. This was a fascinating read) Gabrielle Anwar and the role she may have played in helping Al Pacino finally win an Oscar Markata Irglova finally gets to speak after the commercial break And an article on the juicy Crash vs Brokeback Mountain controversy! Good stuff!

I forgot about that. That was the live thing with Christopher Walken that got pretty mocked, as I recall. Two people have responded to your post with laughing emojis, so I'm uncertain if your intention was to be serious or sarcastic when you say Jordan Peele cast her largely off of this performance. IMDB says she will be in a suspense thriller called The Perfection, currently in pre-production and allegedly due out sometime this year.

I don't even know if she really thinks of herself as a professional actress, or if she intends to stay in the profession. I'm unaware if she's ever done anything besides Girls and this movie. I was kind of surprised none of the white people in this movie got supporting category nominations. Catherine Keener would have been the most obvious choice, but Williams, Bradley Whitford, Caleb Landry-Jones and Stephen Root were all also great.

Thought I would bump this thread to put it above the two-plus page of spam plaguing the boards right now ... (and, hey, why is this stuff always on General Discussions? Are the bots smart enough to know which boards are which?)

I think you're misreading what he's saying. He's not saying the talent level of the other nominees is the equivalent of a high school team playing the Green Bay Packers. He's saying their chances of winning were about the same. He's not being insulting to them, I'm sure. I'm not crazy about the horse race aspects of the awards shows, but most Americans who watch the Oscars seem to be into that, so he's just playing to his audience.

Yeah, I didn't hear anything "inane". He said there was a chance Social Network might sneak out with a Best Picture win, but he also said The King's Speech was the favorite, and indeed, it won. All his other predictions were correct. Do you mean the Green Bay Packers analogy was inane? That's all I can figure. He's just trying to say something Joe Schmo can relate to. He was not talking specifically to the TCM crowd that night. I didn't really find that so inane, either. What really got my attention, though, was the clip ends on a freeze frame of Kevin Spacey, obviously during happier times for him!

Seems like a lot of people on here watch very little of 31 Days or skip it altogether. I usually end up watching a lot of it, and this year, I REALLY watched a lot! I didn't mind. It's kind of a refresher course in "TCM's Greatest Hits", most of them also being the movies they play most often, anyway. Though I'd seen virtually all of them multiple times, sometimes many times, some of them I hadn't seen in quite a while. I guess I try to get them all out of the way in one month, and if those titles pop again during the rest of the year, I don't go out of my way to watch them (though I did watch The Three Faces of Eve again tonight. Who knows, being a Fox movie, it might be five years before TCM shows it again). So, here are all the movies I watched, arranged in chronological order of the years they were relased: 1928 Wings (Paramount) 1930 All Quiet on the Western Front (Universal) 1931 Cimarron (RKO) 1935 Mutiny on the Bounty (MGM) 1936 Swing Time (RKO) San Francisco (MGM) Mr. Deeds Goes to Town (Columbia) The Great Ziegfeld (MGM) 1937 The Awful Truth (Columbia) 1938 The Adventures of Robin Hood (Warner Bros.) 1939 Wuthering Heights (United Artists) Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (Columbia) Goodbye, Mr. Chips (MGM) 1940 The Grapes of Wrath (20th Century Fox) 1941 That Hamilton Woman (United Artists) The Great Lie (Warner Bros.) Suspicion (RKO) 1942 Yankee Doodle Dandy (Warner Bros.) Woman of the Year (MGM) 1943 The Song of Bernadette (20th Century Fox) Air Force (Warner Bros.) For Whom the Bell Tolls (Paramount) 1946 The Harvey Girls (MGM) The Best Years of Our Lives (RKO) 1947 Black Narcissus (Universal) The Bachelor and the Bobby Soxer (RKO) 1949 All the King's Men (Columbia) 1950 Born Yesterday (Columbia) 1951 An American in Paris (MGM) 1952 Limelight (United Artists) Moulin Rouge (United Artists) Viva Zapata! (20th Century Fox) 1954 On the Waterfront (Columbia) 1955 Marty (United Artists) Picnic (Columbia) 1957 The Enemy Below (20th Century Fox) The Three Faces of Eve (20th Century Fox) The Bridge on the River Kwai (Columbia) 1958 Gigi (MGM) 1959 Ben-Hur (MGM) 1960 The Alamo (United Artists) Butterfield 8 (MGM) 1961 The Hustler (20th Century Fox) 1962 Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? (Warner Bros.) 1963 How the West Was Won (MGM) 1964 Zorba the Greek (20th Century Fox) My Fair Lady (Warner Bros.) 1965 Darling (Embassy) A Thousand Clowns (United Artists) Cat Ballou (Columbia) 1966 Grand Prix (MGM) A Man for All Seasons (Columbia) 1968 2001: A Space Odyssey (MGM) 1970 Patton (MGM) 1971 Fiddler on the Roof (United Artists) 1972 The Poseidon Adventure (20th Century Fox) Cabaret (ABC) Sounder (20th Century Fox) 1974 Harry and Tonto (20th Century Fox) 1976 Bound for Glory (United Artists) Logan's Run (MGM) All the President's Men (Warner Bros.) 1979 Being There (United Artists) Kramer vs. Kramer (Columbia) 1984 A Passage to India (Columbia) 1985 Coccoon (20th Century Fox) 1992 A River Runs through It (Columbia) 1995 Braveheart (Paramount) 2007 There Will Be Blood (Paramount) That's 69 films I watched in 31 days! I didn't count the documentaries. For some reason, I couldn't watch much on foreign film day. I've forgotten why. It wasn't because I didn't want to. I saw the first hour of La Strada, but I'm not including it, because I didn't watch the whole thing. Maybe I was just tired and went to bed early that night. I don't know how many films aired in total this year. I assume 360 is a good estimate, since at least twice, TCM has formatted the month with "360 Degrees of Oscar". That would mean I watched 19 per cent of the films showed. Broken down by studio: MGM 13 Columbia 13 20th Century Fox 12 United Artists 10 Warner Bros. 7 RKO 6 Paramount 4 Universal 2 Embassy 1 ABC 1 Virtually all my viewing was in primetime, so these were the films TCM most intended viewers to see. Maybe three times all month I got home in time to watch the last movie shown before the primetime schedule began. The by-studio ratios are a little out of whack in comparison to the content for the month as a whole. They put a big chunk of all the Columbia and Fox films they showed in primetime. The daytime hours were more loaded with "in-library" fare. The Paramount selections were a little odd. For Whom the Bell Tolls was pretty much the only Paramount film now owned by Universal shown in primetime the whole month. There were a few others in the daytime, I think. As for Paramount films owned by Paramount, well, there was Wings, and then all the rest were from the last 25 years (including the documentary An Inconvenient Truth). I don't know if TCM has much say about what Paramount offers in a lease package. Looks like they wanted to push modern product. Somebody said few Paramount films owned by Paramount have been digitized, which is why TCM shows dramatically fewer of them since TV switched to digital signal. That's certainly sad if it's true. And there were really no Univerals at all, except for All Quiet on the Western Front. There were a couple of British films (Hamlet and Black Narcissus) that were distributed by Universal back in the day, so I counted them as Universals, but I don't think Universal has any claim on those films anymore. Broken down by decade: 1920s 1 1930s 12 1940s 14 1950s 13 1960s 13 1970s 11 1980s 2 1990s 2 2000s 1 The primetime fare pretty evenly distributed between the decades from the '30s to the '70s, which is pretty standard for 31 Days (maybe the '30s don't always quite get such equal footing), with a handful of post-1980 films scattered about, as they have every year. So, the only films on here I'd never seen before were The Enemy Below, Buttefield 8 (how had I missed that? It's probably on again this month as part of the Elizabeth Taylor tribute) and Braveheart, which I somehow never saw despite it being a Best Picture winner, so I've knocked one more of those off my list. Black Narcissus, Limelight and How the West Was Won I'd seen bits and pieces of before, but this was the first time I'd ever seen any of them all the way through. The other 63, I'd probably seen all of them at least three times each, some of them many more times than that. Call me a glutton for punishment, but I watched them again!

I saw Madonna in concert in 2010. She's not really my thing, though she's done any number of good songs over the years, but I knew there would be some visually spectacular set pieces and choreography, and I've tried to check off some of the biggest performers of all time when they come to my town. The show was scheduled to start at 7 p.m., and it started at TEN-THIRTY! And this was a Sunday night, people. I literally only got about three and a half hours sleep after I got home and had to go to work in the morning. But I'd paid close to $100 for my ticket. I wasn't just going to go home because she was three and a half hours late in starting. But I will never go see her again!

Boy, I love Europsy movies, especially if you include some modern movies. The Jason Bourne movies? Ronin? The Gary Oldman version of Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy? Even the just-released Red Sparrow. If its' a Eurospy movie, I'll go see it! I think you're very wrongly slandering a really strong subgenre! There are SO many subgenres that have made plenty more wretched, unwatchable films! Are you saying the Eurospy genre is worse than the torture-porn/Saw genre? Or the super-loud soundtrack/jump-scare genre? Or the Steven Seagal genre? Or the movie based on a videogame genre? Or the teen vampire genre? Or, or ...

When Ms. Saint said that she was older than Oscar, I thought it was a joke (Jane Fonda and Helen Mirren made a similar joke about the age of Oscar relative to themselves later in the show), but it wasn't! Though she was playing a college-age girl in On the Waterfront, like Dustin Hoffman in The Graduate, she was actually 29. So, 64 years later, she's 93! And looks great.

TCM showed The Godfather and The Godfather Part II back-to-back in 2008. I remember reading somewhere, probably on these boards, that there was literally like a one-day window after one very long-term exclusive rights contract for those two movies expired and another one began. It was during Summer Under the Stars, and they literally reshuffled an entire day's programming when they realized they had this one-time-only opportunity. The actress originally scheduled for the day in question got bumped - I forgot who - and TCM wrangled together enough other movies to turn it into a Robert Duvall day instead.

On the third different thread, I'm going to post that he so far tends to give away way too much information about the plot of a film. He certainly has with The Three Faces of Eve, which he's introduced twice now in his short time on TCM. The first time he introduced it, he told the viewer literally 90 per cent of what happens in a film that is heavy on plot twists and surprises regarding the psyche of its main character. He didn't say how it ended, but he revealed EVERYTHING right up to almost the end. I was interested to see if his second introduction would be any different, but it wasn't. Other than he didn't mention 31 Days this time, his intro was a word-for-word repeat of his first one. Dave, I know the odds you'll actually read this are, well, zero, but maybe some functionary who has contact with you will see it: part of the fun of watching a movie is being surprised by the plot! Especially if it's a movie that's intended to surprise you! Every movie TCM airs is being watched for the first time by somebody! Don't keep giving away the whole movie before they've even seen it! I beg you! I'm starting to become as repetitive about this as you-know-who is about that Hot movie, but I'm just sayin' ...

I was also stunned by the lack of a general Oscar thread. As I recall, last year, someone was taking the time to create a thread and make a post with a link to Variety or something as each winner was announced. I almost started a thread with the exact same title. I heard today this was the least-watched Oscars ever, with only 29 million viewers. That's still no small potatoes for TV these days - 29 million viewers was almost one out of every three people watching network TV at that time. But it's rougher times for network TV these days, except for the Super Bowl. The days when 130 million people or whatever all watch the last episode of M*A*S*H at the same time are long gone. I started a couple of threads during the ceremony, hoping to generate some conversation, but no. I figured at least the hard-core right-wingers on here would let us know they hate Jane Fonda or tell us how all the accusations of rape are fake news (one poster on here actually said that) or how they hate the demonization of white men or whatever, but not even any of that! So, maybe it's just that like in the nation in general, fewer TCM message board members than ever watched the ceremonies this year. Or maybe it's the horrible explosion of spam the last few days (still going on tonight, I see), by far the worst continued existence of it in the 10 years I've been on these boards that has kept everyone away. It is definitely exhausting every time I come on here 90% of the topic titles on Page One are in Korean.