classicsfan1119
-
Posts
3,078 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by classicsfan1119
-
-
I'm reminded today that "you'll live forever, so long as you're remembered", when I see the name of Henry Travers.
Happy Birthday, Henry!
-
Oh yes..."if you live where it snow, be sure to check for show on your dish". Good grief! Hopefully everyone figured out what I was meaning to say??? ML
-
Being a new subscriber to a Satellite dish, and also living in the mountains of Montana, I have learned that if over an inch of snow sticks to my dish that various channels will start crumbling into megapixal squares as the satellite moves across the sky. So, if you live where it snow, be sure to check for show on your dish.
I was taping that movie last night, too (even though I already have it on tape...whew) so that I could go to sleep and just leave the tape recorder running. I will not be pleased when I go to watch that tape now to see the rest of the Chaplin things that showed after it, if I also got many minutes of blank picture during "Tillie's....". Oh well. That's how it goes sometimes. Because TCM has "Tillie's Punctured Romance" I'm sure it will be shown again in the future (smile), so be patient and keep looking for it.
ML
-
Hey Path... "Shane" belongs to me when I can't think of a movie and want another clue, so you give it back and find your own!!!
Smiling, and with a friendly wink,
ML
-
Speaking of Character or Supporting actors/actresses, I just saw a clip TCM has done for Edna Mae Oliver. They have someone briefly (too briefly) talking about this wonderful character while at the same time offering several clips of Oliver in some Classic films.
Now, if TCM can put together a very nice one-minute spot for so many people, why can't they also put together a one-hour special for all these people who we'll never remember or know anything about unless they do? How many people here even know who Edna Mae Oliver is (without checking at IBDb), or what Classic movies she was in? I know that I've seen her face countless times, but I knew nothing about her, and that just ain't right at a station that shows so many wonderful Classic movies everyday.
No matter how or when TCM "might" possibly start introducing us to these Character and Supporting actors/actresses, I will be happy beyond my wildest dreams. ML
-
Tip for you, LTL: If you've ever taped anything in the past at AMC, and even before they started up all with the commercials, you will definitely want to retape over AMC with what you will see on TCM (if TCM has it in their library). I always knew that AMC was editing for "content", and to show "in the time allowed", but I still assumed that I was watching/taping a movie that hadn't been hacked to pieces so it would fit in a certain time frame. That part wasn't made clear to the viewer by AMC, and because I thought at the time that AMC was the best channel on the air for Classic movies that I could receive, I trusted them to be giving me the complete film.
Sometimes, if you get it, HBO will also show something like "Now Voyager" or another excellent Classic, and I'm hearing that the FOX channel is currently showing some very good classics, if you can pick that channel up. I can't, and I have no idea if FOX's films are as complete as TCM's are.
ML
-
And, my dear, you really have no idea how wonderful it is to "hear your voice" again, and to read your incredible words of wisdom everywhere I see your name. You are so loved among us!
Thanks much for your link...I will try again right away to get in.
About the Chaplin things on TCM tonight, I already have seen and taped (smile) "Charlie: The Life and Art of Charles Chaplin", and you're right, it's excellent. It will be on where I live starting at 6:00 PM. But then, starting at 2:00 AM they have scheduled "Chaplin AT Essanay Studio's III", and following that, "Chaplin At Essanay Studios IV". I don't have those and can hardly wait to see them.
TCM gifted us with Chaplin and Marie Dressler's "Tillie's Punctured Romance" (1914) a while back, which shows just ahead of the Essanay features tonight. I'm sure you've already seen it, and I loved it and instantly developed a much deeper interest in Marie Dressler, which was also rewarded when TCM showed Dressler's "Emma" very recently. Wow! What would we do without TCM?
Be good to yourself today!
ML
-
I've been watching Jean Harlow's movies all day. What a tragic loss to the film industry, and her fans. Who knows how far she would have gone, and how polished she would have become during a much longer career? What she had even then was so awesome. ML
-
A definite yes about James Whitmore, Moira! He goes way back, and would give a totally facinating interview. The history he is carrying around with him is wonderfully dense. I sure wish that TCM would snag him before it's too late. ML
-
I don't know if it's for Loony Toons, but "The Merry-go-round Broke Down" is used by one of them (smile). ML
-
I certainly agree that if an interview could be done (without showing an elderly person who doesn't wish to be seen by the public anymore) by doing the interview showing clips from that person's films, we would at least get something to keep of this actor or actress, and I've said many times on these boards that I think it's criminal not to have interviews or documentary spots of all those who are too quickly reaching the end of the trail. They should have been done years ago!
There are a great many still living film industry people I would be very intrested in seeing on TCM, even in the middle of the night, if they would just get something on film, and of course most of all, the incredible Anne Bancroft! There are also a great many Character or Supporting Actors that deserve being preserved on film in an interview before it's too late.
ML
-
Gosh it's good to see someone mention "The Red Shoes". I bet that there are lots of people here who haven't even seen it. ML
-
Oh, I forgot to add that because we've entered this century and technology like CGI will probably keep getting better and better, and used more and more, I think that it's time that The Academy establishes a distinct category for Computer Generated Imagery, separating that out from what we used to know as "special effects", and the Academy is currently lumping all together under the category of Visual Effects. Maybe I'm wrong, but I still think that there is a big difference between CGI and other special effects we see, and the kind of CGI we're seeing in movies like "Lord of the Rings..." is simply shoving any other's out of the running.
I was terribly disappointed at the number of other wonderful movies that really were "shoved aside" in categories where they should have won the Oscar so that "Lord of the Rings..." could make that clean sweep. That will never sit right with me.
Patypancake asked at the beginning of this thread if anyone had any ideas how to make the Academy Award Ceremony less boring. I would suggest that the Academy make it very clear that these horrendously boring laundry lists that people are hand carrying up on the stage with them must cease!, and that it's really only the Academy, the movie's Producer, and the movie's Director that need to be thanked, and then let's move along! And, I'd like to see them immediately pull the audio plug on anyone who starts up with a personal political speech. Thanks to Janet Jackson, the stations all have the capability for 5-second delay now, so they can edit-out anything that is inappropriate or offensive.
And, after watching the marvelous Billy Crystal moving around in the audience and spontaneously getting some interesting interactions between himself and the stars, I really wish they would plan to do more of that every year to make up for all the time that by eliminating the long and boring "thank you speeches" would free up in a three-hour show. I really enjoy seeing the stars just being themselves, and acting as natural as they can in that kind of a situation. And, for sure, I much prefer an acceptance speech that comes from the heart over what it has become in recent years.
-
My mentioning of CGI in a different thread (not in this one) had to do with these technolgical things that have come along like CGI, and certainly do enhance many a film (I still can't get over seeing "Jurassic Park" the first time!) but which also seem to be leading more and more producers into producing the kinds of films that will draw a large audience into the movie theatre because of the CGI, and return mega-bucks to them. I certainly wasn't saying that the CGI in "The Lord of the Rings...." wasn't very nicely done, important to the filming, and even valuable in keeping true to the books. It's this kind of film where CGI is at it's best, (IMHO), and I don't dislike CGI on the whole.
-
I'll add that I was totally astounded at the amount of "editing" done at AMC that also affected continuity of a great many films I liked and taped even before they started adding commercials, too, and that's when they lost me. When I finally got to see the WHOLE movie at TCM, boy, what a difference! ML
-
Hi Littletramplover! I just caught in the "21-Question Game" thread you started for us (way back in October!!) that you're back, and I welcomed you there, but want to welcome you back again here, too. I hope that it won't be a disappointment, I have to let you know that I'm not a "him", I'm a "her".
I hope that you already have TCM's Schedule for this month (March), or you'll download it. This month features Charlie Chaplin's (you remember him, don't you?) feature length films, or his short films, plus documentary features about his life in film. Some of this starts during Prime Time where I live, but a lot will also be on during the middle of the night. I'll set an alarm clock if I have to, so I can at least get everything on tape that I've never seen before!
As I'm typing this to you, the theme from "Limelight" is playing on my radio! Wow...how significant is that for the two of us?
One last thing...I've previously tried to log on to your web page, and got back a message that it was no longer there to get into. Will you post that link again so that I can try again. I really want to visit it!
ML (classicsfan1119)
-
Welcome back! I've really missed you (and been a little worried about you), and it's really great to see you're okay and back with us again! You wouldn't believe how successful the "21-Questions Thread" you started for us has been. We've had a lot of fun keeping it going.
ML
-
Bggalaxy, After you've seen "The Human Comedy" I think that you'll agree that in this movie, Mickey Rooney gives one of his best juvenile performances. Actually, I think that everyone in this movie gave outstanding performances. Let us know what you think of it tomorrow, Ok? ML
-
I grew up on Glenn Miller, and still play his music today! Is it Jackie Gleason and Harry Morgan?
-
Great leads, Venerados!
-
My impression of Charlize Theron by now, and after seeing her incredible performance in "Monster" indicates to me that she is not only very attractive, but most certainly has the ability to play any role she accepts, regardless of the Genre. Why compare her to anyone else? She is who she is, she's here now, and I find her to be the kind of actress I will spend money to see.
ML
-
I also agree with many things said in this thread. There have been several things that I think Hollywood has gone way overboard with, including too much graphic violence, foul language, and sex scenes that leave nothing to the viewer's imagination in the way they did through the 50's.
I'll always remember a scene in a war movie (someone help me with the title if you remember this, too) made in the late 40's or early 50's in which a man was seperated from his unit after a battle, and someone in his unit was calling to him their location and to come to them, and he shouted back, "I can't, my legs are gone!" Did I need to see that on the screen to clearly picture it in my mind? Nope. And the opening 11-minutes of graphic horror depicted in "Saving Private Ryan" wasn't able to impact me as much as that scene did.
I often think that Hollywood forgets that the movie-going public isn't really so dull that we need to be shown absolutely everything, and that our awareness or imaginations are quite capable with "getting the picture", and keeping up with the story without such an abundance of what I mentioned above.
And, I'll also agree that the kind of "comedy" that we're seeing now on the big screen doesn't even come close to the kind of comedy and acting that was comedy in earlier decades. But, there is a huge audience for actors like Jim Carey and Ben Stiller, et.al., and Hollywood is making huge bucks off them as a result. Carey was the highest paid actor in Hollywood last year. Check out where you see it printed, what Hollywood is making when these innane films open during the first weekend of release, and you'll get the picture.
As for the trend in Epics and Adventure or Action films, we can thank the computer and the ability to generate incredibly realistic visual graphics for their success with the public. And, as long as there is an audience for computer generated grapics, and Hollywood is making megabucks, we will continue to see a great many of them released during the year. The sound effects we also have today also attracts just about everyone. I still remember how amazed I was the first time I heard 'surround sound' and THX, and could follow the sound in a circle around the theatre. WOW!
But I stop short of thinking that all movies today have become terrible, or consistently worse than movies of earlier decades. There have always been some "bad" movies made. But, when I see a movies like "Seabiscuit" and "Lost In Translation" among the top five films nominated for Best Picture last year, I'm wondering if maybe we're beginning to see a bit of a turn back toward movies that aren't all "R" rated. I sure hope so, and to "walk my talk", I support them in theatres when they are released.
There have also been some terrific drama's in recent years that were recognized by both Hollywood and movie-goers, that managed to be very successful without being "R" rated, so I'm not giving up on Hollywood just yet, and I'm not thinking that Hollywood has completely given up yet, either.
ML
-
Wow, Spencer...of the eight categories you voted in to post on these boards, you only missed one after making some final "last minute adjustments"! Many Congratulations, Spencer! I certainly didn't fare as well. In these eight categories, I missed two. I joined a great many others who began to seriously consider that Bill Murray could receive the Oscar for Best Actor. I also missed for Adapted Screenplay along with Spencer.
I think that the biggest surprise of the evening was when "The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King" actually did make a clean sweep! No way did I believe that would happen.
Congratulations to everyone who went home last night carrying "the reflection of the Academy's affection"!
ML
-
Moira, a very eloquent assessment of the appeal of "Mrs. Miniver", then and yet again in our times. This movie is one of those 'On the Homefront' movies that gave the folks back home the courage to face the horrors of war without losing hope and faith. I'm sure this is why "Mrs. Miniver", which is also an excellently filmed movie, continues to endure, even in America.
Although this film was about a British family much closer to the actual war than we've been until 9-11, and their entire country had to endure a great many more hardships than we will probably ever have to endure here, the message of courage, faith, and hope will endure forever through this movie, no matter where our countrymen are fighting a war, be it here or in another country. I have to agree with others in believing that "Mrs. Miniver" is more along the lines of a "valuable treasure" many film lovers will prize forever, than it is a "curio...artifact...relic...or curiosity". I'm always pleased when TCM shows it.
Oscar Postmortem:2004
in Hot Topics
Posted
I've heard that Greer Garson's speech that night reportedly lasted very close to one-half hour. Just out of curiosity concerning what on earth she found it necessary to talk about for that lengh of time, I'd love to see a clip of the whole speech sometime (smile). ML