route66

Sounds like sure-fire hit to me!

> It seems to me I remember a film with Irene Dunne where she played a mayor of a small town, who somehow gets mistaken for a stripper, I think Charles Boyer was in it... RV, The movie you're thinking of must be "Together Again" (1944). Irene Dunne and Charles Boyer made three movies together, the other two being "Love Affair" and "When Tomorrow Comes"

> I can't wait for The Major and The Minor to be released, either. It's one of my favorites! SueSue, "The Major and the Minor" has been out on DVD since last April. You can find it at some online retailers for about $13: http://www.amazon.com/Major-Minor-Universal-Cinema-Classics/dp/B0012GVMIU/

> Frank, > Those are some great pictures of the artifacts you found from the 1906 earthquake. Thanks so much for sharing them! Did you by any chance mean _"Fred"_ ?

Sorry, I didn't mean to break the train of thought with my post about "Deluge". I appreciate reading what everyone had to say about their experiences during earthquakes. I'm checking my recording of "The Rains Came", would anyone here mind if I share a few screencaps from the earthquake/flooding scenes?

> Why, yes. In fact, I use mine whenever I dress up like Ray Walston, which I do quite frequently. Got any photos you'd like to share?

> For a truly amazing example of a breathtaking use of miniatures, check out the 1933 film DELUGE sometime, in which most of the civilized world is destroyed by a flood, including some spectacular shots of the destruction of New York City, which turned up as stock footage in numerous films for years afterward. I was intrigued by the name of the film, which I don't think I had heard before. Here are some youtube videos with the highlights of the movie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48YaKhJRFyA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAFQcEnUxhs Some scenes appear nearly identical to those in "The Day After Tomorrow". This video compares the similar shots: You can't help but wonder if the makers of the more recent movie weren't somewhat inspired by the 1933 classic!

I was corrected by someone else yesterday, because I had been a bit in the dark about when exactly the Academy started giving out Oscars for Special Effects, so I had done a little bit of "research" into this and everything that you say here sounds about right. The category simply didn't exist before 1939. This is why "San Francisco" and "King Kong" were never nominated - they couldn't have been, because the category had not yet been created. To the best of my recollection I had not heard of Slavko Vorkapich before, but I would like to learn more about him and his contribution to the special effects technology. The only special effect technician of the Golden Age of Hollywood that I've known about for a long time is Willis O'Brien, who created the stop-motion effects for "King Kong". There is more about him here: http://www2.netdoor.com/~campbab/Obie.html His work was instrumental in the industry, and he would inspire later filmmakers like Ray Harryhausen and special-effects wizards like Phil Tippet. From the info I just dug up, O'Brien was apparently the first person to receive an Oscar for work involving stop-motion animation, but not for "King Kong" - for the sequel "Son of Kong" in 1950.

*While I may not be wild about all of Kurosawa's films, I can appreciate how much he influenced filmmaking and other filmmakers. It really is amazing to trace his influences, especially in regards to what are considered 'standard' Hollywood storylines now.* You're absolutely right, SharpDame. Sometimes I wonder how many people realize what a huge influence he had on movies that have become a big part of American pop culture. "Yojimbo" inspired "For a Fistful of Dollars", which in turn started the spaghetti westerns. And "The Hidden Fortress" was one of the main inspirations behind "Star Wars", and we all know how much that changed popular American filmmaking. Thank you, TCM, for showing two of Kurasawa's best as part of "31 Days of Oscar". From "Yojimbo" to "For a Fistful of Dollars"

*It wasn't meant as an insult to the posters here. I think we all have friends in our lives who like movies but not on the level that many of us necessarily do. Not everyone knows the back stories and not everyone wants to know them. Doesn't make anyone right or anyone wrong. I've spent years being appreciated for and good-naturedly jibed for the "useless" information my brain refuses to forget. I don't mind that I have friends who aren't that into movies as I am. I have fun sharing my stories with them.* Oh, I know you didn't mean to disparage anybody who posts here But you are right that from a very _practical_ point of view, there may be people who don't consider this information all that important. For some of us, on the other hand, it could be almost as vital as the air that we breathe. Ultimately if you are talking about movies and really being serious about it, it should be taken as seriously as any other kind of art appreciation. Music, painting, sculpture, etc. Of course in this day and age, for some people they are only interested in the entertainment aspect of it, or the business aspect of it, and not quite as interested in the artistic aspect, the vital element to which the old MGM motto made reference to - art for art's sake. The "practical" people back in the day didn't hesitate to have the negatives of many major movies recycled for the nitrate or whatever it was called. Today, those of us who are exceedingly fond of movies from past decades (as you and I surely must be) can only lament that such negatives are lost forever, that we can only have access to a 35mm print, or a 16mm print, or any other source. I don't want to digress, but Rey has been extremely gracious with his time and his reference material, and given us an excellent overview about the behind-the-scenes elements that helped to shape *They Were Expendable*. I look forward to more such insightful posts - from anyone who can share.

*Your post is very much in keeping with what I hoped this forum would be used for, a place to share the stories as well as the expertise of posters who walk around with a lot of what many consider "useless" information in their heads or on the shelves of their bookcases as well as a place to talk in depth about the film makers and the films themselves.* I would think it very sad for anyone to consider this kind of knowledge "useless", especially if they enjoy watching classic movies. Personally I think it's extremely useful information, because it enhances our ability to enjoy and appreciate the movies we like to watch. Rey's post was so insightful into the way that the developments of World War II shaped this particular John Ford movie that I almost wish the discussion could perhaps some day be extended (if not in this particular thread, anywhere where it is appropriate) to all of the ways in which Hollywood careers were altered by that war. I know just a few details, aside from what Rey mentioned in regards to John Ford today, about the way the war affected careers. I've some rough idea about the many European emigr?s (both actors and directors) who came to America because they had to flee from Europe. There were also a few actors who enlisted and went to fight in the war, which in turn made it possible for some up-and-coming younger actors to receive opportunities they wouldn't otherwise have had. For example, I think Van Johnson got a few really good parts during the war years he couldn't otherwise have had. To really grasp all of the many big and small ways in which American movies were shaped by the magnitude of that war could probably require enough material to fill a good book. I'm not aware of any books that look at this specifically from the point of view of the movie industry, but if any such books actually exist, I would be happy for any recommendations anyone might have.

*Well, this pretty much spells the end of the movie careers of Cheech and Chong.* Really? I didn't know they were still making movies.

Bob, My understanding is that TCM plays Fox movies on a somewhat more limited basis due to contractual reasons. It seems Fox likes to play many of its movies on its own movie channel. But, TCM still does get to play them now and then. They have played "The Rains Came" and "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid" recently, among others. Hope that helps.

Try to research your information a bit more carefully, FF. The director of record for "Viva Villa!" was JACK CONWAY, not Hawks. But, to be fair, it's true that Hawks was the original director of the movie, and was fired from the movie after an argument with L.B. Mayer over the unruly Lee Tracy. From the TCM article: > Howard Hawks was Viva Villa!'s first director, and he did a lot more than make a few casting decisions. To this day, it's unclear how much of the finished picture is his, but Hawks understood the theoretical prestige of working for MGM, not that it suited his personality. In later years he wrote, "Metro was the best place in the world for getting a script and handing it to a director with it all cast and the sets all built - they had the best set designers, and they had good writers - but I don't think an independent worked well over there." http://www.tcm.com/thismonth/article/?cid=87929 And of course, any director who would punch Mayer in the mouth probably can't be all bad.

It's a great film, which makes it all the more sad to see how badly Paramount has fumbled with its treatment of it, now that they own the video rights. It's almost 10 years into the DVD age and the "African Queen" DVD is still nowhere to be seen. (At least not in the U.S.)

It's always great when movie fans take notice of the "less famous" actors who helped give life to so many great characters. The presence of someone like Ben Johnson in any part, large or small, adds infinitely to any movie. Someone already mentioned "Wagon Master", and there are many other westerns. Sad to say, the first time I watched "The Last Picture Show", I didn't really know who he was. I'm glad I know now. Message was edited by: route66

lulu, don't worry about replying later on, just glad to hear you love "Penny Serenade". I think last time I checked there was no decent DVD of it, there is a handful of movies with Irene Dunne that is in what's known as "public domain" and good copies on video can be hard to come by. "Love Affair" is another "public domain" title, it seems.

> its not really about the quantity of the posts, but rather what is in the posts that really count. Well, the quality of your posts is definitely above-average by a mile. Naturally, there are also some gals who can be gabby, but that's another story. Seriously, sometimes it isn't easy in this day and age to sit down and compose a long, well thought-out piece that might as well be called a mini-essay. Sometimes one will just ramble their thoughts and try to write it all down and hope it will make some sense. Sometimes it comes across clearly, sometimes not so much. Your posts are definitely among the best! > I agree with every thing you wrote this morning. The one thing that really bothers me about TWE, is the fact that unless you watch TCM, you are probably never going to see this fine movie anywhere else. Maybe, AMC, since they just showed a slew of war movies last weekend in there shameful excuse for Oscar nominated films. And of course on video and DVD. It would be great if the movie would enjoy greater popularity, but it's hard for many classics to get noticed as it is unless they've somehow become larger-than-life through the years. This is not easy for all movies. In this regard "TWE" may have been at a disadvantage since the moment of its initial release for the very reasons that you already mentioned (coming out after the end of the war, etc.)

That was a really fascinating read, Rey. It definitely helps to put "TWE" in a historical perspective. One can only wonder what Pappy must have been feeling, knowing the war was coming to an end even as he worked on the movie. And it is truly ironic that one of the best WW2 movies made during the first half of the 40s would wind up feeling somewhat "dated" (for lack of a better word) to moviegoers who were already looking to moving on, to putting the war behind them to some extent at least. Thank you very much for all the effort that doubtlessly went into writing that, including of course all the careful research that you mentioned.

Hey, what about those who don't get the TCM Now Playing guide?

You're welcome, mongo! Since RedHerring mentioned it, I thought it might make a nice addition to the "Bathtub Gallery". Your photos are always awesome! Keep it up!

*http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toyLQzd8HrY* I love Lucy!

Thought this story might be of interest since it mentions TCM weekend host Ben Mankiewicz: `At the Movies' critics dish it out, take it too By LYNN ELBER, AP Television Writer BEVERLY HILLS, Calif. ? "At the Movies" critics Ben Mankiewicz and Ben Lyons have been taking it as well as dishing it out since joining the show last fall. That's especially true for Lyons, who's gotten heat from fellow critics and others for hobnobbing with Hollywood insiders and his alleged quest for blurb glory in movie ads. They don't like his reviews much, either. While everyone's entitled to their opinion, Mankiewicz said, the thumbs-down for his colleague is "just wrong." "Nobody who meets him is going to doubt that this guy knows a lot about film and is thoughtful about it, is interested and wants to talk about it," he said. "Everything came through this prism of presuming that he's young and didn't know what he was talking about." Lyons said the attacks are inaccurate but leave him unfazed. "It hasn't bothered me, hasn't affected me. I'm traveling, working, have a couple different jobs going on. I'm too busy to let it get to me," he said. "I do look at it as I criticize people's work, someone's going to criticize my work." During lunch in a chic hotel (tuna sandwich for Lyons, chicken soup for Mankiewicz), they're as eager to discuss the Oscars as their show. The pair contrast sharply: Mankiewicz, 41, is low-key and droll, while Lyons, 27, is all boyish enthusiasm. When Lyons mentions their different opinions of the dysfunctional family drama "Rachel Getting Married," which he declares he "loved," Mankiewicz pulls a face. "It's not over yet. I think it's 98 hours long and it's just about ready to wrap up," Mankiewicz quips. Lyons, a Hollywood reporter and film critic for "E! News" and others, and Turner Classic Movies host Mankiewicz started last September on the show distributed by Disney-ABC Domestic Television. They replaced Richard Roeper, who'd been working with guest critics since illness took Roger Ebert off the air in 2006. (Ebert's trademark thumbs up-down is gone, too.) Lyons and Mankiewicz commute from Los Angeles to Chicago, where the show is produced, for tapings. Viewership initially dipped, with 1.8 million tuning in compared to the nearly 2.4 million it was averaging last season. But there's been a steady uptick, to 2.3 million viewers in January, according to ratings released by Disney. Lyons and Mankiewicz say their on-air chemistry still is jelling as they move at a fast clip through films, squeezing in an extra review ? about six total, along with DVD critiques ? in the latest incarnation of the long-running show. Observers have criticized the revamp as a surrender to lightweight criticism, with Lyons bearing the brunt of the attacks. "It's kind of mindboggling to me that we're at this point that Ben Lyons basically has become the face of film criticism," said Erik Childress, vice president of the Chicago Film Critics Association. He was willing to give Lyons a chance but "it seems every week he's out there saying something completely moronic," Childress said, adding that Mankiewicz is trying "to keep the spirit of the show alive." Scott Johnson, a blogger who founded StopBenLyons.com, said Lyons "seems more interested in kind of playing into what's the latest vehicle for hype and seeing if he can jump on the band wagon rather than being critical and offering an opinion that's going to challenge people." Lyons takes issue with claims that he's angling to get quoted in movie ads and panders to the industry. His reviews have been "blurbed" far less than those of other critics, he said. And mingling with Hollywood insiders is helpful as long as he keeps his reviews honest, Lyons said, insisting that he does. "In the past, it might have hurt the show a bit that (reviewers) were isolated in Chicago. I enjoy the fact that I'm out here in L.A. and I know writers and directors and actors. I'm young and I'm going to be out and social and to meet people and develop genuine friendships with them and understand the (artistic) choices they've made," he said. Mankiewicz's wry aside: "I'm not young, I'm not social and I don't enjoying going out. But I want to establish that we get along really well." It's the latest twist in the journey of "At the Movies," which had its roots in a 1975 PBS series with Chicago newspaper critics Ebert and Gene Siskel (who died in 1999) and became the leading national TV forum for film criticism. Ebert, a Pulitzer Prize winner, and Siskel offered brief but trenchant TV assessments of movies that they analyzed in greater depth and detail in print. That was then and this is now, Mankiewicz and Lyons said. "This is a TV show and the notion that only people who qualify to talk about film criticism are people who have written for a newspaper seems silly," Mankiewicz said. Look at it this way, he adds: Would anyone suggest that NBC anchor Brian Williams write "750 to 2,500 words on the stimulus package before he discusses it on the air?" That does not signal any less respect for films or those who make them, the pair say, and they produce family history as evidence. Mankiewicz's grandfather, writer Herman Mankiewicz ("Citizen Kane") and great-uncle, writer-director Joseph Mankiewicz ("All About Eve," "A Letter to Three Wives") both are Oscar winners. Lyons, whose grandfather was New York Post columnist Leonard Lyons, went to screenings as a child with his dad, critic Jeffrey Lyons, who encouraged his appreciation of classic films. When it comes to movie criticism, Lyons and Mankiewicz say tradition is giving way to the rising chorus of voices online. That gives them a sharp appreciation of their "high-profile platform," Lyons said. "Everybody can be a critic but that doesn't mean that everybody takes it seriously or responsibly, and that's something we can do. It's our job, it's what we do and love, so we treat it with the utmost respect."

I love the Dunne movies you just mentioned, lulu. "I Remember Mama" is such a great holiday classic. Have you seen "Penny Serenade"? It starts in about half an hour.

Is playing classical really that much harder than everything else?