speedracer5
-
Posts
11,245 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
22
Posts posted by speedracer5
-
-
In Sorry Wrong Number, Barbara Stanwyck is an invalid due to a psychosomatic illness.
-
I recorded "Ministry of Fear" and "The Blue Gardenia." I'm excited to watch both. I saw Lang's "The Woman in the Window" and thought it was excellent.
-
I concur about Katharine Hepburn and Humphrey Bogart in The African Queen. That was a great film.
I really liked:
Errol Flynn and Fred MacMurray in Dive Bomber.
Montgomery Clift and Burt Lancaster in From Here to Eternity.
Burt Lancaster and Barbara Stanwyck in Sorry Wrong Number.
Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman in Casablanca.
-
Agree, agree! Too bad Poehler and Fey have said this is their last year. They are very good together.
The most curious part are the actors who think they are making a statement by wearing their own clothes. They (hopefully) have lots of money, why they wouldn't engage a famous designer is beyond me. I know I would. Remember the cluck with the swan dress?
Yes, it's a much more enjoyable show than the Oscars.
I think Poehler and Fey are great together. They should host everything. I agree with actors wearing their own clothes. However, this does provide for some delightful bad fashion moments, so I guess we should thank them. Lol. I do remember Bjork with her swan dress, that was at the Oscars one year when she was nominated for Best Original Song. While the dress was definitely crazy, I appreciated that she was there. It was a nice change from all the boring beige, black and white dresses.
The problem with the Oscars (while I still do watch) is that they try too hard.
-
What I like about the Golden Globes is that it is usually more relaxed and it's more of a fancy dinner party with food and alcohol. It's funny when someone, whose category (or appearance) is later in the evening... especially when it's obvious they may have had a few drinks before hand.
That's my favorite part of the GG.
Oh, and the fashions. And the fact that the very cruel Ms. Rivers is gone.
I am more interested to see what horrible dresses people are wearing. The good dresses are whatever, the horrible ones is where the real fun is. There tend to be more risks taken at the Golden Globes than the stuffier Oscars. I also like that the Golden Globes don't have the ill-conceived production numbers. They just get to the point and start handing out the awards.
Sometimes I thought Joan Rivers was funny (just because of the outrageous things she'd say)... but toward the end of her reign on the red carpet, she got more ridiculous and I didn't think she was as funny anymore. I always thought her daughter was incredibly annoying.
I also thought it was hilarious that one year when Renee Zelwegger's name was called as the winner and she was MIA. It turned out she was in the bathroom. Those are the types of things that don't happen enough at the Oscars. The only funny thing I remember happening at the Oscars recently was when Jennifer Lawrence won and she tripped on her enormous dress and fell on the stairs.
Last year at the Golden Globes, one of my favorites, Emma Thompson, appeared on stage, not wearing shoes and drinking a martini. That was hilarious.
-
I always found the scene in From Here to Eternity when Montgomery Clift plays "Taps" on his bugle after Frank Sinatra dies to be a tearjerker. Especially when they show tears running down Clift's face while he's playing.
-
Re: The fashion component. This has been going on for years now. The award shows have become a venue for designers to showcase their creations by having the stars wear them. Hence Joan Rivers' famous question: "Who are you wearing?" The bigger the star you are, the more designers you'll have begging you to wear one of their gowns to the big show.
Even though the Oscar is the biggest honor you can win in the industry, I always felt that the Golden Globe was a legitimate award. The Hollywood Foreign Press Association votes on the awards. I imagine that most of those in contention for awards are not part of the HFPA. While the members of the HFPA are involved in the industry in the sense that they are photographers and correspondents, I would be led to believe that this group is more impartial to the nominees. The Golden Globes less likely have people campaigning heavily for them. Golden Globes typically aren't given to people to make up for snubbing them the year before. Nor are they usually given out to reward someone for an overall body of work, not just the particular film they were nominated for. I think the Golden Globes can usually lead to some interesting (and sometimes unexpected) choices. I don't think they are necessarily indicative of the Oscar in that the actors are separated by Drama and Comedy. An actor could be nominated in the Comedy category at the Globes but when the two categories are merged together for the Oscars, that actor might not even make the cut. I think the SAG awards can be a bigger indicator of Oscar nominees/winners, in that the members of the Screen Actors Guild are also usually members of the Academy.
What I like about the Golden Globes is that it is usually more relaxed and it's more of a fancy dinner party with food and alcohol. It's funny when someone, whose category (or appearance) is later in the evening... especially when it's obvious they may have had a few drinks before hand. I also like seeing the TV people and Movie people together.
-
1
-
-
I thank you for your kind words.
I fear that wording of requirement may not be understandable to all. I hope any who have confusion will please note it and I will do my best to adjust so that it is understandable.
That sounds as if it requires much dedication to your avocation. I have seen hunting cabins and fishing shacks but this is first I have heard of Internet house.
Thank you. Lol re: internet house. I have to keep on top of the house listings online for areas I'm interested in moving in. Houses up in the Portland Metro area seem to be in a high demand, or at least high demand in my price range. It's very frustrating and I've only been at it for a couple weeks.
I think I have my SOTM narrowed down to a handful. I think I already have my Friday Night Spotlight picked out.
-
Excellent challenge SansFin! I'm looking forward to creating another schedule.
In fact, I may start brainstorming right now. It'll be a nice break from the internet house hunting...
-
I feel like anyone whose persona is representative of a specific era would not translate well in modern times. Jean Harlow, I think, is very much a product of the 1930s. While she is growing on me and I like her work, I don't think she would find success today.
Someone whose personality is more progressive and not dated would make it today. Bette Davis, Barbara Stanwyck, William Holden and Cary Grant would all succeed. I think this would be true of modern actors as well. George Clooney is kind of our modern Cary Grant and I think he would have done just fine in the Golden Era. Other performers like the aforementioned Meryl Streep and Julianne Moore would have done just fine. I think Amy Adams and Jennifer Lawrence would have done well in studio era films as well. Now people who are just in films as a result of nepotism (Nicholas Cage) or who have had repeat box office flops (Kevin Costner) I don't think would have done well. People like Paris Hilton, Kim Kardashian and others who are put in films based on their reputation or name would have never made it in the studio era either, as they wouldn't have been in any films in the first place. The studio era seemed to be more interested in cultivating stars who could be a good return on their investment. Whereas today, it seems that many filmmakers are interested in sacrificing quality in return for guaranteed receipts by casting someone notorious.
-
I'm surprised you didn't say; Too bad I didn't find him in my stockings!
Lol. I didn't think of that. As long as I was in the stocking too... I'd be concerned if he were wearing my stockings.
-
1
-
-
Same here. I embarrassed the hell out of myself while watching Homeward Bound: The Incredible Journey on a flight.
Ahhh. I forgot all about "Homeward Bound." That part when The old dog, Shadow, tells the young dog, Chance to go ahead with out him, he's learned all he needs to know, except how to say goodbye. Then at the end, when Chance and Sassy come home and it seems like Shadow didn't make it, it's heart wrenching. Then you see Shadow and it's even more heart wrenching.
When Charlotte dies in "Charlotte's Web" that was really sad. Wilbur protects Charlotte's egg sacs in order to help her babies hatch. Charlotte's 5,000 babies hatch and eventually leave the farm.
-
Now Speedy. Doesn't the line, "Shane! Come back Shane!" ring just a LITTLE bell inside your head there?!
(...Brandon's next most famous role was probably in the movie "Hud", and in which be played Paul Newman's idolizing teenage nephew)
I haven't seen Shane ::blushes::
I haven't seen Hud either. I looked him up on imdb and see he died at the age of 30 after hitting a parked car with his camper.
He had an Oscar nomination and had some pretty high-end co-stars. It seems like he could have hit it big. That's a shame.
-
Oooh, just thought o' one I know you'll appreciate as a "tearjerker", O' Originator of Thread...and I'll bet our gal Speedy will too...
The scene near the end of "Adventures of Don Juan" where Errol and Viveca Lindfors must part company due to their different stations in life.
(...not bad, eh?!...oh, and of course, the similar ending in "The Prisoner of Zenda" will always bring a tear to me little eye too)
I forgot about that scene between Errol and Viveca. I agree, that is a tearjerker.
I've always also teared up in that scene between Errol and Ward Bond in Gentleman Jim where Bond brings Errol his heavyweight belt.
Darn that Errol! He does sentiment very well.
-
2
-
-
Good topic. Many of the actors I see for the first time in old movies impress me. When I look them up, I find they've died in their 40s or 50s, and I wonder what they might have accomplished (or not!) had they lived.
A current actor whose career was sadly and tragically cut too short was Philip Seymour Hoffman.
And ditto on Carole Lombard, what a tragedy.
Agreed. I remember looking up your beloved Warren William and saw that he died in his early 50s. I wonder if he hadn't passed so early, maybe he would have had a resurgence late in his career. He looks the type that would have done really well in noir.
-
Brandon De Wilde, Carole Lombard, Rudolf Valentino. What would they have evolved into? Would Valentino have made it in Talkies?
I'm sorry to say I don't know who Brandon De Wilde is. I'm curious if Carole Lombard would have been able to segue into film noir.
Valentino, while I haven't seen any of his films, I'd think it'd be interesting to 1) Hear what he sounded like and 2) To see if he was a real actor and not just a pretty boy in a Sheik outfit. I bet he would have starred in a talkie remake of The Sheik as his first foray into talking pictures.
-
Marilyn Monroe and James Dean both died young and tragically. One could argue that their young deaths are partly responsible (or entirely responsible) for their legend. Other stars died before their time (Jean Harlow). Some died by their own hand (Carole Landis). Of course, then there are others whose deaths were inevitable due to their own bad habits (Judy Garland and Errol Flynn). Stars like Judy Holliday and Audrey Hepburn died young due to cancer and others had unfortunate accidents (Natalie Wood).
What if these tragedies, overdoses, diseases, etc. hadn't happened? What if these stars had lived long lives and long (or longer) careers? What do you suspect may have happened to them? Did they win the Oscar? Retire and become a recluse in Hawaii?
(This isn't limited to the people I mentioned above. Anyone who died young).
I'll go first:
If Marilyn Monroe had continued on her career trajectory, starting with Bus Stop when she was trying to go for more serious fare, and continuing through to The Misfits, I think she would have finally gotten the roles she was dying for. After completing Something's Gotta Give, Monroe would have gotten a meaty role in a drama. She stops bleaching her hair and turns up in her next film with her natural brown hair, no make up and in frumpy clothes. She's able to finally give the serious, emotionally raw performance she's been dying to give. She receives rave reviews and her career is forever changed. Monroe gets her first Academy Award nomination for Best Actress.
-
What the human race had become in Wall E (and what's coming) could bring one to tears.
Agreed. The sad thing about Wall-E is that it is barely exaggerating, the bleak future that Wall-E predicts for the human race could happen. It's only a matter of time before we're permanently orbiting in space due to our ruining Earth and making it uninhabitable.
A while ago, I was at the store and someone was in the vestibule blocking the automatic door because they were trying to maneuver their enormous stroller through the doors and keep track of other little kids running around. Instead of, oh I don't know, using the regular door to go into the store, people were actually lining up in front of the automatic door. I just used the regular door and was inside before anyone else. Of course, that did involve extending my arm and exerting a little strength to open the door, I guess that's too much to ask of some people.
-
TOMJH, I was going to say that same scene in They Died With Their Boots On that you mentioned. Beautiful scene. Probably one of Errol and Olivia's best, if not the best.
Any movies where beloved pets die, like Old Yeller always gets me.
This is a little more recent, but I think Pixar has the corner marketed on heart wrenching scenes. I've found myself tearing up at the last three I saw:
Wall-E, when Wall-E doesn't recognize Eva after she repaired and reactivated him. His system has been restored to its original format and he's now an emotionless, trash compacting robot (his original function). Heartbroken, Eva holds Wall-E's hand (something he'd been trying to do with her the whole film) and gives him an electric kiss.
Up. This movie has two tearjerkers: 1) At the beginning of the film, there is a montage showing Carl and Ellie's relationship. We see them as children, teenagers dating, young adults marrying, Ellie presumably finding out she cannot have children and their subsequent life afterward. Then there are scenes of them running up a hill. Time and time again they both run up the hill effortlessly, except Ellie starts having trouble. A few scenes show Ellie having more and more trouble. There are scenes showing Carl sitting by Ellie's bed side, until she eventually dies. Carl, heartbroken, spends his days sitting on a bench. 2) Further into the film, Carl is looking through he and Ellie's "Adventure Book" (a scrapbook chronicling their adventures together). He had never turned past the page showing their dream to have a home on top of Paradise Falls. He turns past the page and sees a note from Ellie telling him to go have his own adventure.
Toy Story 3. I did not except to be emotionally affected by a Toy Story film, but Pixar did it again. There are two scenes: 1) The toys holding hands facing their inevitable fate of being burned alive in an incinerator and 2) The end of the film when the toys are dropped off at the daycare and Andy says goodbye to Woody.
-
Alas, I love Rod!
Always thought he was hot even before I knew about the Australian accent
...he'll always be Pongo to me
RIP Rod
I know what you mean about those Australians. That country has produced so many gorgeous men, I don't know what is in the water down there... but keep up the good work Australia!
I didn't know he was the voice of Pongo!
RIP Rod.
-
1
-
-
It is a fascinating autobiography. Even if some of it is embellished, it is entertaining from beginning to end. Errol Flynn was a talented storyteller. I don't think he did what he was accused of either. In his book, he admits to having done some pretty awful things and he flat out denies it in his book. He even says that when rumors got out about him, he'd admit it if it were true, but he'd adamantly deny anything that wasn't and I believe he sued a few magazines for libel and won. Flynn says in his book (and his friend Buster Wiles corroborates Flynn's story in his book) that he thinks he was being used as a scapegoat by the police (I think, but I can't remember) to take responsibility for all the unsavory acts committed by Hollywood. Fortunately, jack Warner hired Flynn a high powered attorney that was able to destroy the plaintiffs' cases.Sounds like a great book to read. I really enjoy autobiographies. I find it hard to believe he did what he was accused of. So the jury felt the same way.
Good luck with the house hunting.
While the whole incident deeply embarrassed and angered Flynn, it made him even more popular at the box office. Other performers (eg Fatty Arbuckle), would have seen their careers ruined by such a sensationalized event, but not Flynn.
Re: house hunting, Thank you!
-
Here I am. Merry Christmas! (A few days late...)
Lol. Too bad I didn't find him under the tree.
-
1
-
-
I haven't been able to watch as many movies as usual, because my husband and I are knee deep in house hunting. Fun but frustrating at the same time.
Anyway... I managed to fit in a few films:
BELLS ARE RINGING- Not only did I get to hear what Judy Holliday's real voice sounded like, I also got to hear Jean Stapleton's as well. Very interesting. It's amazing how Holliday created such a different voice for her Billie Dawn character in Born Yesterday. I really like Judy in this film, she's a great singer. Dean Martin co-stars and he's excellent as well. I liked the premise of the movie, very interesting. Judy works for an answering service and frequently passes on tidbits of information to other clients when she thinks she can help. She ends up falling in love with Dean Martin, one her clients, even though she's never seen him. I'm a fan of Vincente Minnelli and Comden and Green's screenplays. This musical was a win-win for me. It's a shame that Judy's life was cut short.
BACHELOR MOTHER- While I can't say I'm a huge fan of Ginger Rogers, I think she's growing on me somewhat. I like David Niven and I liked them in this film together. This was a fun film and I especially enjoyed seeing the 1939 Donald Duck toys!
SWING TIME- Another Ginger Rogers film, but this time with Fred Astaire. While I've said in the past that I'm more of a fan of Astaire solo (or with other partners) and not so much of the celebrated Astaire/Rogers combo, I have to say that I enjoyed this film. Suffice it to say, I think Ginger Rogers is growing on me. I also enjoyed her in Stage Door but that was because the film had multiple people I like (Katharine Hepburn, Lucille Ball and Ann Miller) and Rogers was funny. Can I watch a film starring Ginger Rogers without there being a co-star that I like? Only time will tell.
EASY TO LOVE- I don't know why I watched this. I'm not a fan of Esther Williams in the slightest. She's too stiff when she's not in the water. Even it being a musical didn't save it-- no dancing. Synchronized swimming is not as interesting. Honestly, my favorite part was when they showed a pair of dancers' legs. One set of legs belonged to Cyd Charisse. I did notice though that this film is the film that Frank Sinatra and Debbie Reynolds watch in The Tender Trap which aired right before this film.
CHRISTMAS IN CONNECTICUT- I really liked this film. Barbara Stanwyck is amazing. I love her in everything. SZ Sakall is hilarious and I'm glad he pops up in so many films.
MY FAVORITE WIFE- While the film started out promising, Cary Grant and Irene Dunne, and it was generally amusing for the most part, I hated the ending. It was terrible. I think the Doris Day/James Garner remake, Move Over Darling was better.
GIMMIE SHELTER- This documentary about The Rolling Stones' ill-fated free concert in 1969 was very interesting. While the Stones were fine, I found the 1969 audience fascinating. It was such a different time and the crowd made for great viewing.
THE OUT OF TOWNERS- I'm a big fan of Jack Lemmon. I am undecided about Sandy Dennis. I can't decide if I think she's funny or annoying. I thought this movie was really good. I liked the grittiness of the city against the ridiculousness of Lemmon and Dennis' situations. Great film.
I have 20+ movies on my DVR to watch. I hope I can see all of them (and of course, the others I'm going to record) before my husband and I find our house and I'll have to abandon them when we get our own DVR.
-
I haven't read any of Flynn's writing or biographies, so I wonder if any one knows if Errol Flynn ever voiced regret at the way he lived? and that he wished he hadn't done what he did?
From what I've read in his autobiography, My Wicked Wicked Ways, it sounds like at the beginning of the career, he kept himself in check. He showed up to work on time and worked hard. While he may have hit the clubs frequently (or had raging parties at his home), he didn't allow it to interfere with his work. He was living the high life and enjoying the fruits of his labor. It was after his trial when he started his steady decline. He mentions the effect the trial had on his psyche and how he actually considered suicide a couple times, but couldn't bring himself to do it. When he made his WWII films, he actually bounced back and was very dedicated to those films. I believe he stated that since his health prevented him from being accepted into any branch of the armed forces, he figured that his war films were his contribution. He seemed to keep up this work ethic until he received a bad review about his performance in, I believe, Escape Me Never, and he retreated back into the booze and never fully recovered. Then the 1950s brought him major financial issues and his alcoholism worsened.
I can't remember if he explicitly states regret of previous actions, but I feel like it's implied in the last third of the book when he's discussing his depression. While the first two thirds of the book sound like he's almost bragging about the things he's done, the last third is very retrospective and sad. The tone of the book changes as he discusses all the ways that his life is a shadow of what it once was. He also doesn't sound optimistic about the future-- saying (in 1958, Errol was 49), "The second half-century looms up, but I don't feel the night coming on."
Could stars from Hollywood's past have become stars in modern Hollywood and could stars of modern Hollywood have made it in the past?
in General Discussions
Posted
I think the actors specific to genre went out when the studio system disappeared. During the studio system era, actors were pigeonholed into whatever genre delivered box office receipts.
Cagney/Robinson/Bogart- Gangster films
Flynn- Swashbucklers/Adventure films
Davis- "Weepies"
Grant- Screwball comedies/Romantic comedies
Garland- Musicals
Etc.
When actors appeared in films outside their "accepted" genre, i.e. Flynn appearing in screwball comedies, many times their films did not do well at the box office, because fans wanted to see Flynn (for example) swinging a sword. James Cagney was known for his Gangster films but wanted to do more musicals. In fact, he won an Oscar for his musical, Yankee Doodle Dandy. I believe Cagney only made 4-5 musicals versus however many dozens of gangster films he appeared in. Cagney's gangster films made money, his musicals were not as successful, which is why he appeared in so many gangster films.
Also, during the studio system, specific studios were known for churning out a certain type of film. Warner Brothers, for example, was mostly known for their Gangster and Adventure films, with the occasional drama to suit Bette Davis. MGM was known for their musicals for Judy Garland, Mickey Rooney and Gene Kelly.
When the studio system dissolved in the 1960s, the actors were freelance and studios seemed to produce whatever type of film was brought to them by outside producers. I could be wrong, but I don't believe that studios had writers, producers, etc. on the payroll anymore to churn out screenplays and scripts. In the current system, I believe that production companies rent out soundstages at studios to produce their films. An actor could do one film at Warner Brothers, the next at Paramount and the next at MGM.
It's hard to say which system I prefer.
With the studio system, I find there to be a higher quality of the overall product. The actors seem better suited for their roles, mostly because their role was probably written with them in mind. Sometimes however, it can seem like the overall story (dialogue, actor's performance, etc.) can be hampered by the rigidity of the production code and the studio's desire to maintain a specific image for their actor. It's the studio system films that skirt the rules through innuendo and other tricks that prove to be the most interesting.
However, with the current system, it seems that films are allowed to take more risks. Some "risks" are a little less savory (gratuitous sex and profanity, for example) and others make the films fun and interesting. The freedom that actors have to fully immerse themselves in their role and not worry about ruining an image of them allows them to grow more as performers.
I think both systems have their pros and cons. I can't state a preference for one system over another, because I just love movies in general. Both types of systems have produced tons of great films and tons of not so great films.