speedracer5

Thanks for the recommendations Andy! While I don't dislike Novak, I do find her to be a bit stiff. For whatever reason though, she ends up growing on me as the film progresses. Pushover sounds really good. I love Double Indemnity. Middle of the Night sounds really interesting as well. I thought Novak was really good in The Man With the Golden Arm.

Oh yeah! I forgot about that one. I really liked that movie. It was my favorite of the Rat Pack movies. At the time my sister and I had our Robin Hood marathon, I hadn't seen that one before, let alone owned it so that it could join our line up of DVDs and Blu-Rays.

A while back, on a rainy Oregon day (which granted, in Oregon, there are many), my sister and I watched all the various incarnations of Robin Hood to see aspects of the Robin Hood tale the filmmakers decided to utilize in their story. While we didn't watch EVERY version of Robin Hood, we did watch quite a few: -Rabbit Hood, Bugs Bunny cartoon -Robin Hood Daffy, Daffy Duck Cartoon -The Adventures of Robin Hood, Errol Flynn -Robin Hood, Disney -Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, Kevin Costner's version -Robin Hood: Men in Tights, Mel Brooks' take on the Robin Hood legend We didn't have time to watch the Russell Crowe version. I'm sure there are tons of other variations of the legend that have been produced. Anyway. What I gleaned from all these various takes on the Robin Hood legend was that there many different characters and different events which shape the overall Robin Hood tale. Errol Flynn's 'Robin Hood' is definitely a more positive spin on the tale. The gorgeous color, the beautiful costumes, the lush landscapes, this was more of the fantasy version of the story. It's interesting that Sir Guy of Gisborne only exists in this version. I am not sure if he's a real character in the Robin Hood legend, or whether Warner Brothers invented him for the film. Disney's take on Robin Hood was definitely goofy, but overall the story was similar to the legend presented in Flynn's version, except Prince John was made out to be a total doofus. Kevin Costner's version was a little ridiculous, but what was interesting was that the story started with an older Robin Hood returning to Sherwood Forest with Will Scarlet (I believe it was Scarlet, or it was Little John, can't remember) after The Crusades. This was interesting because I hadn't heard of The Crusades as being part of the Robin Hood legend before. It seemed that Costner was trying to make a little grittier take on the legend, but I found Costner completely lacking in the charisma that I always imagine Robin Hood having, because it seems like he would need it in order to have the entire population of Sherwood Forest follow him. I will admit though, I loved Alan Rickman's take on the Sheriff of Nottingham. He was like a rock star version. This was the first Robin Hood where the Sheriff of Nottingham was a more developed character and the first one with a witch character. Robin Hood: Men in Tights was obviously not a serious take on the legend, but was a combination of aspects from Flynn and Costner's versions. This film is hilarious and I think Cary Elwes made a better Robin Hood than Costner. I thought it'd be fun to discuss all the different incarnations of the Robin Hood legend that were produced in Hollywood and how the story was interpreted in different ways.

I second MissWonderly's pick of Mystery Street. That was a very good film noir and an interesting early Ricardo Montalban role. I really only know him as KHAAAAAAN! and Mr. Roarke. I also liked Jan Sterling. I had never heard of her and then by coincidence watched Ace in the Hole and Mystery Street within days of each other. She was excellent in both films. My other picks for tomorrow are The Bad Seed, a fun horror movie that takes the cliche horror movie character, the creepy child, and actually makes them the villain. I also really like Top Hat with Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers. Watch out for an early Lucille Ball role. She has a bit part as a flower shop clerk. My MISS for tomorrow is definitely Brigadoon. As much as I love Gene Kelly, I cannot recommend this film. While it is a beautiful film (Technicolor wise) it is BORING. The most memorable thing about it are Van Johnson's red plaid pants.

I've seen both Girl Crazy and Words and Music... I can't even remember Allyson in either of them. Judy Garland is the best part of Girl Crazy and Words and Music (Mickey Rooney irritates me 75% of the time). I thought Gene Kelly and Vera-Ellen were the most memorable part of Words and Music. I will check out The Shrike if/when it airs on TCM. Thanks! I thought Allyson was okay in Executive Suite but that's probably because of the strength of the ensemble cast that she was a part of. Thanks for the recommendation!

For whatever reason, I found Bogart attractive in his younger movies--especially Casablanca, maybe it's the white dinner jacket. By the 1950s though, he definitely had the hound-dog look going, and he just looked old and tired. Cary Grant I think got better looking as he got a little more "distinguished" looking.

I'm watching The Front Page right now, and I must say the opening credits captivated me. No special effects or fancy graphics or anything-- it was literally just a group of men putting together the daily printing of a 1920s newspaper. They showed a group of men printing on type writers that were attached to these machines that created "stamps" so to speak of the various newspaper articles. Then it showed someone putting together the letters to create the headlines and then all the various blocks containing the various articles and accompanying photographs were organized to resemble the front page of the newspaper. A machine came to push all the stamps together. Then the stamps were brushed with ink. Large rolls of paper were then attached to the machine and the papers were printed. I always wondered how old timey newspapers were printed--I knew a printing press was involved, but it's amazing that all these small print articles could be stamped out on these little blocks. I sure hope they recycled the blocks--maybe melted them down and re-used them? I don't know.

I really like The Third Man too. I love the mood of the film and I agree that the setting is wonderful. I honestly don't even remember the zither music that everyone's complaining about, it must not have bothered me when I watched it. I felt that the music that played fit well with the ambiance of the film. I'm a fan of Joseph Cotten and with Shadow of Doubt, this is one of his best films. I thought Orson Welles was excellent as the villain, Harry Lime. I loved his entrance in the film--shrouded in shadows. I recorded this film when it was on last night. When I finish my yard work for the day, I think I'm going to settle in for the night with this movie. I haven't seen it in awhile.

I'm pretty sure I've answered this one before... but for the sake of answering it again, here goes: ERROL FLYNN. Duh. William Holden, Montgomery Clift, James Dean, Cary Grant, Burt Lancaster, Paul Newman, Gene Kelly. For whatever reason, I always think young Jack Lemmon is kind of cute. Not hot, but cute. I also think young Fred MacMurray is cute, but as he got older, he got more average looking.

While I have heard of both films, I have seen neither.

Great schedule Lydecker! I loved those you honored for the "Un-Oscars." I also loved the Honeymoons gone wrong-- imo, The Long, Long Trailer can never be on the TCM schedule too often. I also loved the salute to nightclubs and your boarding house take on the "home" theme. I also love your SOTM selection. I have never heard of Slavko Vorkapich, but love to know that he did movie montages. Who doesn't love a movie montage? 4 excellent schedules have been posted! I look forward to seeing more!

I'm also looking forward to Douglas Fairbanks Jr. I don't think I've ever seen one of his movies before.

Yeah, Ralph and Alf--the Monroe Brothers, even though Ralph was a girl. I loved when they remodeled the Douglas' bedroom, but didn't finish the job and as a result, their bedroom only had three walls.

I agree with the chocolate theory. I think Remick already had an addictive personality. She made the big deal about loving chocolate so much--so when Lemmon makes her the Brandy Alexander, with the chocolate flavored liqueur, that was the beginning of the end for her. Yes it was kind of a girly drink, but it was the gateway drink that started her boozing. Lemmon only made her the chocolate drink to get her to drink with him. Once Remick realized how much she loved the feeling that an alcohol buzz gave her, the more she wanted to maintain it. I believe that's why at the end of the film, she wasn't ready to join Lemmon in his sobriety. Lemmon was ready to be sober, because he realized that alcohol was making him unhappy not happy. Remick on the other hand, was in the opposite camp and only wanted to live in the alcohol induced haze. I have to believe that she had other emotional issues going on that she first soothed with chocolate and later with alcohol. I don't think the film really delves into that very much.

My picks for tomorrow are two Orson Welles movies-- The Third Man and Tomorrow is Forever. I always think of The Third Man as an Orson Welles movie, but it's not, he's just an actor in it. The movie fits his aesthetic so well, it's hard to forget that it was directed by Carol Reed and not Welles. Welles' Harry Lime character is one of the all time great villains in cinema, he also has one of the best onscreen entrances ever. I also really like Tomorrow is Forever with Welles and Claudette Colbert. Natalie Wood also plays Welles' daughter in this film. He and Colbert were a great team. I love seeing Welles in films where he just acts--especially in sweet romantic films like this one. He was a very versatile performer and I look forward to seeing this film again.

I love Green Acres! I thought it was funny because Oliver, the only sane person in Hooterville and someone who wanted to live there couldn't understand what anyone was doing or saying. Lisa, his wife on the other hand, didn't want to live there and was pretty dingy to boot, understood everyone and everything that was happening. I could never understand why they didn't just connect a longer phone cord to their phone so they could answer it on the ground instead of climbing the telephone pole every time they had a call. I also loved the Ziffel's "son" Arnold who was a pig that later became a movie star!

That's a great movie. There are a lot of de Havilland movies I haven't seen-- I have seen all of her films with Errol though Which I see that three of the Flynn/de Havilland movies are scheduled. Those movies don't really matter to me, because I have all of them. I'm surprised they would have scheduled The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex as a de Havilland film-- it is most definitely an Errol Flynn and Bette Davis film. De Havilland doesn't even have a large part in it. I think it's a great schedule and per usual, I see a billion things to record. On the days that seem like duds to me, I could use my own movies and make my own SUTS day (or evening, since I don't have time to watch all 24 hours of the offerings for whatever person). I better clean up my DVR to make room for all the SUTS films. Too bad I'll probably have a billion film noirs on there due to "Summer of Darkness." Oh first world problems...

Holden, Thanks so much for posting the schedule :-) While there's no Errol (it's okay, I can "make" my own on one of the days I'm not interested in), there's plenty that I'm interested in: Gene Tierney, Olivia de Havilland, Teresa Wright, Michael Caine, Fred Astaire, Katharine Hepburn, Ann Margret, Groucho Marx, Joan Crawford, Robert Mitchum, Vivien Leigh, Debbie Reynolds, Ingrid Bergman! While I'm not the biggest Marlene Dietrich fan, her later movies (Touch of Evil and Witness For Prosecution) intrigue me, so I may need to check her out. Excited for August!

My pick for Thursday, May 28, is Alice Adams (1935) with Katharine Hepburn and Fred MacMurray. It's not as well known as some of Hepburn's other films, but I found this film to be very sweet and enjoyable. It's also an early film role for Fred MacMurray. Hepburn plays Alice Adams, a social climber who is trying to climb out of poverty. She attends a dance and meets wealthy Fred MacMurray. The family is in dire straits after Hepburn's father is ostracized from society by his disgruntled former employer. The family tries to do everything they can do to try and impress MacMurray and hopefully get him to marry Hepburn. I really liked this movie. It's not a huge blockbuster or fancy Technicolor movie. It's just a sweet little romantic film starring two actors I like--Hepburn and MacMurray.

I love this movie! CONAN, THE LIBRARIAN! Can you tell me where I can find a book on astronomy? (Conan picks up library patron by collar of sweater) DON'T YOU KNOW THE DEWEY DECIMAL SYSTEM!?

Their first relapse was very sad to watch. I also found it sad when Lemmon, attempting to be sober again, visits Remick who is trashed. She pleads with him to drink with her. He tries to refuse but ultimately ends up drinking. I think that's when he ends up stealing the bottle from the liquor store. Remick's refusal to go straight I thought was very sad and very confusing. For someone to go from not drinking at all at the beginning of the film, to wanting to be drunk all the time at the end was very difficult to understand. She's obviously a bit selfish to put her drinking ahead of her daughter. Although, maybe she figured since Lemmon was clean, he'd take care of Debbie? All I could figure from the ending is that Remick wasn't ready to be sober. Lemmon no longer wanted to drink with her, so she left to seek out someone who does.

I think levity in life is very important. Though it is important to know when is the right time to be serious and when it is the right time to make jokes, when talking about film, levity is always welcome. Film discussions need not to be humorless and formal-- in fact, most normal conversation has a level of levity (or fun) in it. Cracking jokes or what not is a way to break the ice and could also be a defense mechanism. In regard to film, I think having fun while watching a movie is probably the most important criteria. A film doesn't need to be funny for someone to have fun watching it. For instance, I just watched Days of Wine and Roses, definitely not a funny film but it was entertaining. It was compelling and very tragic, however, it held my attention from beginning to end. The worst crime for a film to commit, in my opinion, is to be boring. If I find a film boring, then that's the end of the film for me. You have to be entertained when watching a film, otherwise, why are you watching it? Films that are the most entertaining to me are those that completely engross you in their world. If you can't get into the story or don't find the setting interesting, or what not, then the film has failed. With Days of Wine and Roses, while tragic, I was fully immersed in the world of an alcoholic. I saw how desperate and how bleak that type of lifestyle can be. Even the most serious film usually has a bit of levity in it. Having little funny sight gags, or one liners or what not, keeps the audience entertained. It keeps the film from feeling like a chore to watch. People will lose interest in a film that is 100% serious. Like Miss Wonderly said, even a terrible film can be fun. While sci-fi is not among my favorite genres, I do really like the bad 50s-60s sci fi movies because they're so absurd. You escape into the absurdity of these films and are entertained by them. Sometimes the funniest films are the films that take themselves seriously. Finally, I also like films for the pure escapist element. You become engrossed in the setting through beautiful backgrounds, costumes, charismatic actors, compelling drama, etc. Where else but in the movies could you visit Sherwood Forest, the city of Casablanca in Morocco, the Tara Plantation during the Civil War, and a Hollywood studio at the advent of the talkies? Where else but the movies could you (if you had a full day to spend) visit all these places in one day? The movies contain many amazing settings to visit, characters to meet, songs to sing, battles to fight, etc. A little bit of levity in life is never a bad thing-- even in the most serious of settings. Not the movies, but remember that episode of The Mary Tyler Moore Show when Chuckles the Clown, dressed up in a peanut costume, is killed by a rogue elephant? Throughout the first half of the episode, Lou, Murray, Ted and Sue Ann keep cracking jokes much to Mary's horror. Finally at the funeral, the group is able to keep it together... except for Mary. She finally realizes the absurdity of the situation and can't help but giggle. When finally encouraged to laugh, she breaks down in tears. The Mary Tyler Moore Show took a very serious topic like death but also was able to bring some levity into the situation courtesy of an absurd situation. This episode is considered one of the best episodes of any television show of all time.

Wow! That's really cool!

I grew up watching him on Nick-at-Nite and only really knew of him as Oscar Madison on The Odd Couple. I agree that he was really good as Lemmon's sponsor in this film. His character was the most positive person in Lemmon's life and unfortunately also had to be the one to encourage Lemmon to stay away from his wife if she is going to continue to drink. He tried to get his wife to quit drinking earlier in the film and ended up drinking himself. Klugman's character had to be the bad guy in that Remick was basically left by the wayside (even though, obviously only she could help herself) and Lemmon was the one who he encouraged to stay away from his alcoholic wife in order to maintain his own sobriety. I also really liked Klugman in 12 Angry Men.

As I stated in my "waste of DVR space" thread, I was going to watch Days of Wine and Roses. I am happy to say that this film was NOT a waste of space. It was a very good, albeit very sad, movie. I had never seen this side of Jack Lemmon before. He was a very gifted and versatile performer. The only other Lee Remick film I had seen was her role in A Face in the Crowd where she played Andy Griffith's teen bride. She was very good and very tragic in 'Days.' In this film, Lemmon, an alcoholic, meets the very sober Remick in a bank (or a store? I don't remember). He ends up taking her out on a date and asks if she wants a drink. Remick states that she would rather eat chocolate than drink. Lemmon tells her he has just the drink for her and mixes her up a Brandy Alexander that contains creme de cacao--basically making Remick a chocolate flavored cocktail. This is the beginning of the end for Remick. Lemmon and Remick fall in love and marry. They spend their days drinking and drinking. Lemmon's alcoholism spirals out of control and he ends up being demoted and is sent away on business. Bored, Remick's alcoholism gets worse as she fills her empty time drinking. Lemmon is later fired due to his alcoholism and spends the next few years drifting from job to job. Lemmon and Remick realize that they have a problem and try to sober up together. For awhile, they are sober and working together in Remick's father's landscaping business. That all ends later however, when Lemmon ends up destroying Remick's father's greenhouse looking for stashed booze. The scene of Lemmon crawling around on the ground in the rain is particularly sad and pathetic and shows just how bad he and Remick's problem has gotten. Lemmon ends up joining AA in an effort to sober up. Jack Klugman plays Lemmon's sponsor. Lemmon appeals to Remick to join AA with him, but she won't. She doesn't feel she has a problem and feels that she can handle it herself when she wants to. Her father later tells Lemmon that his daughter has started disappearing for long stretches of time and is even picking up strangers in bars. The most bittersweet moment of the film is at the very end. SPOILER ALERT!! Remick returns to the apartment she shares (or shared) with Lemmon and appeals to him to make things the way they were. Lemmon says that he doesn't want things the way they were, he wants to be sober. Remick states that she likes her life better when she's drinking than when she's not. Lemmon is essentially forced to choose between his sobriety and being with her. He lets her go and Remick walks out the door, leaving her daughter and husband behind. Their daughter, seeing her mom leaving asks her father: "Will mommy ever get well?" Lemmon responds "I did, didn't I?" He looks out the window to watch Remick walk down the street--right toward a lit neon "Bar" sign. This film was so tragic and so sad, but it was also very compelling. Lemmon and Remick did an excellent job portraying two alcoholics and I liked that the film ended on a somewhat uncertain note. It seems that Lemmon will be okay, but what will become of Remick? Based on her actions in the film, things don't look rosy for her. I think I liked this film better than The Lost Weekend. Perhaps because it was made in the early 60s versus the mid 40s, the film had a bit of a gritty aesthetic to it that I think really enhanced the film.