JonnyGeetar

> {quote:title=Swithin wrote:}{quote}JG said "molasses in January slow." That's what some young people today say about our beloved black and white films, including Casablanca ! Just because some people glibly use a certain term (ie "slow" or "dated") in invalid criticism doesn't mean it doesn't apply to any case ever. In The Exorcist the term "slow" really, really does. The first forty minutes feature about three (four?) different stories which do nothing to further the plot or reveal a single thing: NOTHING (worthwhile, scary or even remotely exciting) HAPPENS IN THEM. Casablanca moves along at a brisk clip and every scene is necessary, nothing is superfluous. With The Exorcist I would say you could have sliced at least 30 minutes off the front of the film and the end product would be (somewhat) better. (Or at least mercifully shorter.) Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Oct 13, 2011 3:21 PM

> {quote:title=filmlover wrote}{quote} > You tell us a lot about yourself when you refer to people who defend TCM as "apologists". That's a major slip. 1. No he/she doesn't. 2. No it isn't. Is "Defenders of the Realm" better? ps- don't forget Gaslight

To me, Johnny Guitar is ten times more effective as an allegory for the Black List, Mcarthyism and just plain perversion of justice by people with ulterior motives than High Noon. Whereas Guitar gleefully embraces the false fronts, B-western standards, and decidedly anachronistic appearance of the leading lady, I find all these to be a detriment in High Noon. (really, Grace Kelly as Ye Quaker Bride has got to be the most perfectly made-up and coiffured woman to ever live on the 19th century frontier, and there's something so cheap and TV-Western about it.) W+hereas in Guitar,+ the garish fauxness of it all is just another layer to the cake.

Of course! Watched Rebel too, and as much of Flying Leathernecks as I could take. In fact, Guitar is one of my favorite films to have on whilst I tinker with me screenplay (which is taking a decidedly John Kennedy Toolian amount of time to complete: it's happening soon though, I swear) Something about the audaciousness of the movie, the way it just plows on through, keeps moving bang-bang-bang and never stops to ask "is this thing working?" inspires me. A lot of Crawford's post- Mildred vehicles are like that- Flamingo Road is another I like to have on in the background whilst I type away. This time I got in total synchronicity with the film and revised a whole ten pages! I really enjoyed Chris Isaak's intro, he's the perfect person to introduce it- and would make an intriguing Johnny himself. "the one they call...Johnny Guitaaaaaaaaaaar."

Looking for kindred spirits here: So, I dogsat for some friends this weekend, one of their dogs is 23 years old, so I had to spend the night. Anyhoo, they have Netflix on demand through their Wii, and lemme tell you: the choices are weak, Verrrry few classic movies to choose from- so once I was done catching up on South Park I checked out the choices. One that came up was 1973's The Exorcist Back when I lived in LA and talked movies with people, they'd be like "so what are you into, Man?" and I'd be like, "well, to be honest with you, I'm really into old stuff" and they'd be like "Hell yeah, man! Like the seventies man, when it was all crazy and all about breaking the rules, man! Like Fosse and Coppola and freakin' Freidkin, man!" Then I'd be like: "no, I mean I'm more in to stuff from the 40's and 50's" and they'd be like "oh,cool man" then they'd draw a "square" in the air with their fingers and find someone else to talk to. One of the titles that came up repeatedly in these "You gotta check out the seventies, Man!" moments was The Exorcist I had SO many people tell me "Man, that was the one that broke all the rules, Man, you gotta check it out, Man!" I even had a friend who was unlucky enough to do some script re-writing for a project Freakin' Friedkin was working on in the early aughts (apparently he's a screamer, big shock I know) So I checked out The Exorcist this Saturday, remembering what everyone had drilled into me (I also remember how it did big money in re-release a few years ago, in fact it's the highest grosser in Warner Brothers history.) What a tedious, stupid, unscary, laughable, meandering pile of horse hockey that thing is! Ambitiously plotless for the first forty (and let me add MOLASSES IN JANUARY SLOW) minutes; incredibly stupid ending, "hey, look at me!" camera moves by the director, not a single likeable character, overblown acting (I know Burstyn tried, but really?) some head-scratching script decisions (why on earth is the mother a movie star? what the hell is the deal with the statue head? What the HELL is the deal with Lee J. Cobb's whole character?) Seriously, people were scared by this? Of WHAT? You'd think, judging from a purely asthetic viewpoint, that people in the seventies would be a lot harder to scare. I get that Jaws is scary- but really, seriously, PEOPLE WERE SCARED BY THIS **** MOVIE? For real? (writer's note, I was born in 1978) I personally am terrified by the fact that this thing recieved so many Oscar nominations, including the now infamous selection of Linda Blair as a nominee for Best Supporting Actress (to be fair, she's not bad.) I think the best quote I could find about it came from a review by Vincent Canby which said (and I paraphrase here) :" the whole thing is not put together without intelligence, which makes it all the more trying in the end." Stupid, stupid movie- EASILY one of the most overrated of all time. (Good cinematography though.) Anyone agree? Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Oct 11, 2011 8:08 PM

Yes, I have to say I much prefer this way of doing it to the old Now Playing in (insert month here) 15 minute featurettes featuring Osborne and you-know-who. Very well put together and compelling, just hope they don't become too expensive to produce.

Egads! I'd like to think after that, they'll retire it for a while, but as Oscar month is right around the corner, I'm sure we can count on another another prime time airing (or two.)

Oh good. Although I do have to admit that I liked Winona very much and I think Chris Isaak is doing a _terrific_ job- PLEASE RETAIN HIS SERVICES for the weekends, TCM. Three C's: class, charisma and credentials, put him head and shoulders over a certain someone who shall not be named.

> {quote:title=helenbaby wrote:}{quote} > It's not that I like or dislike Lansbury, she's fine and has done some good films. It's just that I feel like her films are shown with great frequency and I'd like to see someone honored whose films we don't see on a regular basis. Amen, my sister. Which brings me to this question: are they actually showing Gaslight twice in prime time? On the 4rth and 17th? Or am I just misreading a previous post. If they are, this is really weak. If they aren't (and only showing it once) all right, fine, but DAMN that thing shows up A LOT (and always, it seems, in prime time)! And everytime they introduce it they mention it was Lansbury's first film, at the age of 18(?) and that she earned her first Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actress for it. Yawnsville. Which brings me to this point: Gaslight is okay, it could (and should) be a lot better. The conclusion lacks a punch and Bergman doesn't really get interesting until the very end. Furthermore, as courtesy of TCM showing the damn thing 73 times in the last 5 years*** I have watched some or all for a good number of those times and have summised this: Lansbury is very good in it, but a Best Supporting Actress nomination? For what? Her character is really underwritten, more of a question mark than a character. She does the most she can with it, but I don't feel it's Oscar level work. Dorian Grey? Absolutely. Manchurian Candidate, duh- of course. Even in the case of her un-nominated work in Death on the Nile- I'd say she's fun. But Gaslight? Meh. ***A hyperbole for comedic effect. I know it's been more like 25.

> {quote:title=JonasEB wrote:}{quote}No, I wouldn't say so.The poorly assembled ending comes off just silly, whether or not there was any comic intent in it. God Bless you for saying that, Sir. I thought I was the only person left on earth who thought the dowager with a poodle, straight out of a Three Stooges short who knocks the suitcases over was L-A-M-E The Killing is far from one of the best film noirs , far from one of the best movies of the 50's, and far from Kubrick's best- READ THE SOURCE NOVEL: "CLEAN BREAK" BY LIONEL WHITE. IT IS VERY DIFFERENT, 1000 TIMES BETTER, MUCH MORE COMPLICATED, AND DARKER THAN THE MOVIE!

I'm still ignoring. Everyone else still ignoring?

> {quote:title=ValentineXavier wrote:}{quote} > > {quote:title=cody1949 wrote:}{quote}Wouldn't it be terrific if threads like this were totally ignored? Maybe it would make the poster come up with a more sensible subject. > +1 Good idea! Let's all reply to this thread, multiple times even, to voice our choice to totally ignore it.

> {quote:title=MGMMayer wrote}{quote} I get fired up...when people say that Ben M. should be kept on TCM because he's "hot" and looks sexy in jeans. Ew! Ew! Ew! *EWEWEWEW!!!* Grotey-otey-jotey! Besides Miss Wonderly, who I like in spite of her decidedly offbeat taste (or who desperately needs to take advantage of the new wonders of laproscopic eye surgery) I can't think of anyone else on the boards who has mounted the "Ben is hot and sexy" defense. EW! For me, he breasts the tape in front of Larry King, Prince Charles and Henry Kissinger when it comes to pure, undiluted, UN-sexiness and nonhotness. *EW! SUPER PUKE OUT!* PS- refreshing this thread hasn't gotten Ye Padlock yet. I'm thinking they're waiting til the wee hours of the morning to scrub it off the boards. Pss- *EW!*

> {quote:title=LoveFilmNoir wrote:}{quote}**heavy eye roll** > > don't some of you guys get tired of these kinds of threads?! Nope. Love 'em. What I get tired of is how they _always_ get locked and removed from the boards. ps- how does one "heavily" roll one's eyes?

> {quote:title=Kinokima wrote:}{quote}Bedknobs and Broomsticks is definitely not in heavy rotation. It may not be her best but I am definitely looking forward to seeing it again. Admittedly, it has not been on of late, but there was a period about a year (or so)ago where it was on a lot , and often on weekends or primetime (a lot of Disney's live action, sixties/seventies ventures used to haunt the schedule.) I guess we could quibble about it, but since it's not part of the SOTM line-up in January (according to some of the threads here), I guess it's a moot point, Lansbury is a terrific actress, but a lot of her titles are in HEAVY rotation ( Gaslight , National Velvet and (especially) All Fall Down really show up A LOT.) I just can't work myself up for this the way I would a Bela Lugosi month or a Joel McCrea ,month- and I note here that I'm not in to silent films, but I think it's terrific that Buster Keaton is the (MUCH DESERVED) SOTM for October as it has made a lot of people happy and brings some new titles into the rotation. But, (as I've said a few times before) TCM's programming has been much improved, the SUTS was great, The Constant Nymph was nice...so I'll allow whoever has the insatiable thirst for Lansbury to have their jollies in January.

Wow. What an out-of-left-field shock this pick is. All Fall Down ; Gaslight ; Manchurian Candidate ; Bedknobs and Broomsticks ; Dorian Grey ; National Velvet : THEY'RE ALL IN (rather) HEAVY ROTATION THROUGHOUT THE YEAR (and the last few years) ANYWAY. (Although some of them are good, but really, how many times can you watch?) Every month is Angela Lansbury month on TCM. Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Oct 8, 2011 11:30 AM

BOGART'S BEST PERFORMANCES: (IMO) 1. The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948) 2. (tie) Casablanca (1943) and The Maltese Falcon (1941) 3. The Caine Mutiny (1954) 4. High Sierra (1941) 5. In a Lonely Place (1950) 6. The Harder they Fall (1956) I feel like I'm forgetting something...But I'm sure someone'll pipe in to remind me of what I forgot.

I just don't think Fontaine is all that "bad" in Born to be Bad , it's more like Born to be Slightly Underhanded or Born to be a Tad Duplicitous. I took the chance to re-re-watch Knock on Any Door last night and I have to say, I liked it better this time around (missed a good chunk of the beginning, maybe that helped.) The end is very effective and well-done, and while a lot of critics have harped on the script for being too "messagy"- I don't think that's the problem. The problem seems to be that the film was set up to be a launching platform for JOHN DEREK; a vehicle driven by JOHN DEREK, a supporting actor contender for JOHN DEREK. The problem here is that: A. Who the hell did John Derek end up becoming? B. John Derek was very pretty but no Monty Clift. C. You underuse BOGART?! Bogey should take a back seat to no one, least of all the future director of Tarzan the Ape Man and Ghosts Can't Do It.

> {quote:title=TomJH wrote:}{quote}Jonny, while listing Goulding's directorial achievements, please don't omit the 1938 remake of *The Dawn* *Patrol*. I noticed the title, but I have never seen it. (JonnyGeetar hangs his head in shame.) Next time I can, I'll check it out.

(Heartily clapping and spouting multiple "amens" and "preach-on my brothers" throughout your post.) Awesome.

it's worth noting that Edmound Goulding directed this, and it's worth a trip to imdb to check out his very varied output. He directed Grand Hotel : one of only two pictures in all filmdom's history to win the Oscar for Best Picture and not be nominated for direction; he directed Best Picture nominees Dark Victory and The Razor's Edge and was not nominated for either; he directed several actresses to lead acting nominations: Bette Davis, Fay Bainter (in White Banners ) and Fontaine. Mary Astor won an Oscar under his direction for The Great Lie - (although numerous sources have claimed Bette Davis and Astor improvised a lot of dialogue and directed themselves as they thought little of Goulding's talents.) He directed Tyrone Power's one truly great performance in Nightmare Alley and he directed Clifton Webb and Edmund Gwenn to Oscar nods for Razor's Edge and Mister 880 respectively. He also seems to have run the gamut of studios, from MGM to WB to Fox; and he went years between directing films later in his career (he didn't direct again after Nymph for some two years) A lot of his films are good, but flawed in some way or the other that keeps them from being truly great: The Old Maid , Nymph and Dark Victory among them. I would say Grand Hotel and Nightmare Allery are truly great films though. Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Sep 30, 2011 9:13 PM Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Sep 30, 2011 9:19 PM

> {quote:title=TopBilled wrote: }{quote}this picture seemed to defy the traditional Hollywood happy ending. Yeah, on that subject: what malady did Fontaine's character suffer from? Because, if I am someday forced to pick a chronic, fatal condition, I'd like to have something that gives you a couple of "stitches" then you fall over dead instantly one night, looking fantastic all the while. Any clues? (Or did they say in the film and I missed it?)

Someone wrote somewhere about three pages ago in this thread that Nymph is allegedly Fontaine's favorite of her films...I find it a surprise (if true) that she would prefer it to her 1948 self-produced triumph Letter From and Unkown Woman. Maybe she prefers Nymph because it was a hit and she got an Oscar nomination, while Unknown Woman was 0 for 2 But the latter is much, much better. Which brings us to this question: _do you think Fontaine deserved her Oscar nomination for "Nymph" ?_ Me: I'm on the fence. 1943, while a crackerjack year for movies, has a surprising dearth of excellent performances by a lead actress. Of the nominees, I really only completely agree with the selection of Ingrid Bergman (for For Whom The Bell Tolls even though she's even better (albeit with less screen time) in Casablanca ) Other than that, I can only think of Teresa Wright, who really should've been nominated (but wasn't) for Shadow of a Doubt and Ida Lupino for The Hard Way (ditto) I certainly prefer Fontaine's work in Nymph to Jennifer Jones (the winner) in Song of Bernadette ; Greer Garson (along for the ride, again) for Madame Curie and Jean "The Human Car Alarm" Arthur in The More the Merrier - but I think in a stronger year, Fontaine would likely not have made the cut. It's nice that Fontaine recieved a third nomination to cap her career (thus entering the "three timers club"), and it's a gutsy performance- but I'm just not sure it's "up there" with the best. Still, I am sure a good bit of interest in The Constant Nymph has been generated by the fact that Fontaine recieved an Oscar nomination for it.

> {quote:title=Hibi wrote:}{quote}Yes. Cluny Brown does pop up on FMC from time to time. That's how I saw it finally. Why on earth doesnt Fox put this out on DVD?????? IDIOTS! .......... Well, calling them idiots isn't going to win them over to our cause, now is it? Even though they are. (Idiots, that is.)

That is good news...Although I don't get FMC. I'll keep my fingers crossed for a DVD release. It's one of my absolute favorite films of the fourties.