HarryLong

How about Ken Russell? There's a director whose films get very little play on TCM.

>>The people who "don't wanna talk about their days in Hollwood" should give all of the money, houses etc. back Yeah! How dare they enjoy their retirement? Who do they think they are not being at our beck and call until their last breaths?

>>You know those classic cartoon sets you see in the big stores? I bought one that has some great stuff. But the condition is terrible. Betty Boop, Popeye, fairy tales. Priceless features. But unwatchable.<< There is lots of crap on the DVDs in those dollar stores to be sure, but I've also picked up some that were of very high quality, such as the Flesichers' GULLIVER and a disc of all their SUPERMAN cartoons. For a buck, you can afford taking the risk...

>>I thought in it's beginning days it actually was a studio located on Santa Monica Blvd near LaBrea (bascially where the mall, Warner Hollywood and the Formosa are). Fairbanks shot his version of Robin Hood there and at the time, according to Kevin Brownlow, it was the largest set ever constructed. Could have sworn it was UA Studios back then. Unless I'm mistaken that would have been Fairbanks' (& maybe Pickfords') studio. I believe each of the founders had their own studio, but UA never had one.

Sorry. I thought you were referring to the list that had been posted on this thread... (Which I now see - courtesy of a curious "paste" - is a couple months old.)

>>I'm becoming a little concerned with the fact that this is the second release of Warner Archive Collection new titles without a single movie/short from pre-1960 Are we looking at the same list? >>March 16 releases: *Torchy Blane: The Complete Movie Collection* *Too Much, Too Soon (1957)* *Saint Joan (1957)* *Midnight Alibi (1934)* *Chasing Rainbows' (1930)* *"Ripley's Believe It or Not'' shorts* *My Wild Irish Rose (1947)* *The Eddie Cantor Story (1953)* *Lord Byron of Broadway (1930)* Arizona Dreams (1993) Rabbit, Run (1970) Girlfriends (1978) A Man and a Woman: 20 Years Later (1986) Meeting Venus (1991) A Night Full of Rain (1978) The Picasso Summer (1969) The Priest's Wife (1971) Surviving Picasso (1996)

The shot with Ronald Colman... is that from BELOVED ROGUE (I think that's the titlle)? I'd completely forgotten she was in that (years since I saw it).

Just my opinion, but wouldn't it maker more sense to have a single thread devoted to all "identify this movie" questions (as is the case on many other boards) than a plethora of them? Just asking...

Yeah, it's coming to DVD & BR... It'll probably be what prompts me to break down finally & buy a BR player.

>>do ben and robert keep tabs of what movies each are deciding to air? You don't really think they do the programming do you?

Nikki, however, was able to drink Capt. Hendry under the table...

>>I don't know if you know this. Hitchcock made Rope possibly based on a real incident happened in his life. A Hitchcock fan named Ximmerlaik gave me all of these information. ROPE is based on a play of the same name by Patrick Hamilton. It seems to have been inspired (though if I recall correctly Hamilton denied it) on the Leopold & Loeb murder case which happened in the US in the 1920s while Hitchcock was still in Britain. The L&L case was less fictionally explored in COMPULSION starring Orson Welles... I might also note that this Almeida production differs in a few ways from the acting edition available in the US from Samuel French. Kentley isn't a Sir & there's no phone call summoning him home. The party simply runs its course & the guests, except for Rupert, depart. Someone also made mention above of Rupert having a fear of thunderstorms, which is not in the script I worked from in 1988 when I directed a production for a regional theater here in Pennsylvania. Intriguingly, however, I decided to add one to increaee the horror-movie aspects of my production. Edited by: HarryLong on Apr 27, 2010 5:17 PM

I see the edit function disappears here after a spell. My post should have said that Carpenter's film ISN'T a remake of the Hawks/Nyby film... Edited by: HarryLong on Apr 26, 2010 2:43 PM

>>WHY a remake!? Why did he remake THE CRAZIES for that matter?

The restored print must also run longer than the 113 minutes posted bty TCM in their schedule. I was getting a lovely recording ... until it ran longer than the 2 hrs I'd set for the recording. ARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>> Later on came regrets from Ernest Borgnine Considering some of the movies Borgnine made...

Brian dePalma used split-acreen to some extent in most of his movies up to (& including?) BONFIRE AT THE VANITIES. His most extensive use (if I'm remembering correctly) was in SISTERS. But I can't think offhand of any films beyond TOMECODE or WICKED, WICKED that used it so much.

Yes, bring on Chester Morris!

>>What many younger fans today of classic Hollywood don?t realize is the amount of illusions and fakery that went on with numerous movie stars. And it's not just in the movies. I once worked in theater witha woman whose job on one show was to stand in the wings and hit the high-notes for the very famous star of the show. Said star was (and is) a wondeful singer but there were certain inevitable age-related changes happening with her voice & those high notes just weren't possible any more.

>>I didn't mind it so much (the DVD gives you the option of the original soundtrack or the Glass score) as I minded the fact that Glass' music was NON-STOP...a score should underscore the dramatics when needed, but the mistake with the Glass score was that it was unending and unceasing. It never stops....and that's the problem with it. After watching the movie with it for awhile, I eventually find myself thinking "I wish that music would STOP for awhile!". For me the other problem with the Glass score (which I quite like on the CD) is that Glass seemed to think he could make a film that was deliberately paced slowly "move" by providing a scurrying score. It fights the movie every step of the way. Add that to the fact that it plays throughout and I agree: the one time I watched the film with Glass' score I just wished it would stop now & then.

>>I think the film is in the public domain. Adding a new soundtrack to it means the newly tracked version falls under copyright. The 1931 DRACULA is most assuredly _not_ in the public domain.

Yes, Carpenetr's film is truly a remake of the Hawks/Nyby film. It's closer to the book actually & very effective in its own way.

>>The Red Shoes, by the way, is also going to be shown on TCM this Thursday at 8pm ET I wonder if it'll be the restored print?

If I recall correctly, United Artists released it, so TCM should have the rights to show it. And I think they have... but it was a few years ago. Not on DVD, alas. During my high-school "career" as a theater usher, this was one of the films that we showed. I probably saw (or at least heard) it enough to be able to recite huge portions of its dialogue at one time...

Considering the MGM film is a bastardization of the novel, one could just as easily refer to it and say, "Look what they did to THE WONDERFUL WIZARD OF OZ."