JonnyGeetar

> {quote:title=CineramaRick wrote:}{quote} It's interesting to see the different levels of jealousy and hostility (Mankiewicz) brings out in some of the posters to this thread. Oh no, it's just me. I'm in a very, very small minority of people who dislike the Mank with intensity. This is pure hypothesis on my part, but if you took a poll of all regular TCM viewers (and we must number in the hundreds) the results would be: 2%- loathe and despise Ben 20%- I like Ben 77%- Oh, that guy? I guess he's all right- but what's the deal with that ****** 1973 version of Tom Sawyer being on all the time? (with a one percent margin of error.) Keep in mind, this is pure hypothesis on my part. Lord knows I've been wrong before.

> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote}That's what he's planning to wear on our date. To Frank and Gus's (is that the right name? ) You mean Musso and Frank's?

> {quote:title=helenbaby wrote:}{quote}I blame the failure of his version of At the Movies squarely on the shoulders of his partner, Ben Lyons. Now that's a guy who has no business reviewing films. I wholeheartedly agree with you on the second part of your statement. In fact, Lyons has no business conducting interviews or being on television period, talk about riding coattails! (And some inn-teresting allegations about his being "on the take" have been made by some in the media.) Then again, I think there are many critics to whom that applies. Really though, I have the same issues with Rex "Myra Breckinridge" Reed and Roger "Beyond The Valley of The Dolls" Ebert (Pulitzer or no)...Exactly why are we supposed to take their word on anything, ever? (Of course I am sure a lot of established screenwriters and directors would rather not be critics as it is not the part of the artist to publicly rip into other artist's work.) But I cite William Goldman as someone who has written films and has written about films in a witty, articulate, experienced and sane way. Bogdanavich too (no matter how you feel about the skud missile quality of his output.) Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Aug 2, 2011 12:53 PM

> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote} > (pause...) But dammit, I still say *The Big Heat* is a noir ! As do I, my sister, as do I. (I'll throw in yet another plug for Eddie Muller's awesome book Dark City: The Lost World of Film Noir , he has a special section dedicated to Gloria "We're sisters under the mink" Grahame. It's a great read, don't know if its still in print, but it can be ordered on amazon I am sure.

> {quote:title=exapno wrote:}{quote}Oh please - credentials?? Considering the family BM grew up in, one thing you CAN'T question are his credentials...... under that logic, you would also assume that the Kardashian sisters would make a crack defense team for a murder trial or that Drew Barrymore would rock it as Camille or that George W. Bush would have made a basically competent, fiscally conservative, caretaker president not prone to taking risks. Mankiewicz has written NO screenplays, published NO books, has NO column, or any writings of note (Unlike Osborne who has been a columnist of note for a loooong time.) He has a handfull of minor acting credits to his name and some pretty meager efforts as a producer (mostly stuff for The Young Turks who are styu-pid, and this comes from someone who tilts fairly far to the left.) He's directed nothing either. His one other claim to fame was BOMBING so bad as the replacement for Ebert and Roeper that the show was cancelled permanently after something like 15 episodes. He has no charisma, he's not even attractive enough to validate his presence on the network, he regurgitates the imdb trivia entries for films and HE HAS NEVER GOTTEN BETTER AT THE JOB AFTER, WHAT?, SEVEN, EIGHT YEARS ON THE NET? It's the same reason Arli$$ ran on HBO for a jillion years even though no one cared: someone is doing someone's kid a favor, Just let the damn movies play without introduction and save the money for buying some fresh titles so we don't have to sit through Picnic and North by Northwest nine times a year each. So, to re-iterate: BOO! HISS! (rotten tomato) (pineapple) (another rotten tomato) (dead cat) (another rotten tomato) ps- never realized his initials were BM, how apropos pss- I will say that the SUTS line-up is excellent this year, so as to be a complete negative nancy.

(forgiveness, I just can't resist) BOOOOO!!!! HISS! (Rotten tomato), (rotten tomato. ) The Mank is rank! Long live the Wizard of Os!* *- or anyone else who has an ounce of charisma and the actual credentials to be there.

I don't think there was malice or an agenda on Shaheen's part, I just felt like he got a little too peeved over stuff like Drums of Africa and Road to Morrocco and a few of the others I saw him intro, to the point where I quit watching. It's just me though, and I: A. am as whitebread as they come, so of course I can't imagine how it feels to be an ethnic minority and see a representation of oneself on film that one does not jibe with, be it Arab, Jewish, Black etc. B. Try not to take anything too seriously ever, Especially really old, nth rate B-Movies that weren't taken seriously (I imagine) when they came out. I got that they were racist (especially Road with the "thum uh dose and thum o' dose" bit,) but there is something to be said about looking back and seeing how far we've come...and I dunno, something about the dude's delivery just irked me, it was like "oh what's his problem now?" even though I could see his point- I think (even though he had valid points) his delivery turned some people off- granted they were maybe people who wanted to be turned off. (Again, I cite the humorous and nuanced, warts and all look at Gone With The Wind done by several black scholars and writers that often airs during commercials on TCM as an example of something that really could click with anyone.) A sense of humor never hurt anyone, but that's just me opinion (and, TRUST ME, +I+ should never be taken seriously) Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Aug 1, 2011 7:39 PM

I once had an art teacher who told me a story about a gallery showing she had. Two people got into an argument over a landscape she did- one thought a line running through the picture was a road, the other thought it was a river, They came to her and asked her "what is it, a road or a river?" She answered, "it's whatever you want it to be." Film is an art form, we all take away what we chose, we all have our own unique insights, opinions, views, prejudices, etc. There are lots of films I see as noir or at least tottering on the brink of noir that others don't. I see Bad Day at Black Rock as a western. I see Sunset Blvd as an outrageous black comedy. I see Torch Song as a (very effective) horror film. It transcends the makers, the year it was made, the lighting, and who was in it. It's all open to translation, it's all what you want it to be.

Yeah, I'm glad it's over too and I have to say that Professor Stickuphisbutt got on my nerves too. For the past several summers (usually in June) TCM has explored race in cinema and I have to say I enjoyed and learned a lot more from their explorations of Asians and Gays in cinema- enjoyed the line-up much more too. (I note in aside that TCM has now, I believe, officially run out of minorities whose defamation via film can be explored, perhaps next year we'll see a one-day festival Tiny Images: Little People in Film with a retrospective featuring Ship of Fools and The Terror of Tiny Town ) One of the reasons that I liked the TCM docs on Asians in the cinema and the non-TCM (but great) doc on gays in film The Celluloid Closet was the approach they took: yeah sure, there was some offensive, small-minded stuff said and done in films of the past, but there was less pearl-clutching and rightous indignance in both those docs put together than in five minutes of Shaheen ripping apart, oh let's just say The Road to Morocco . I also think of the really interesting bumper commercial TCM often shows where black writers and scholars discuss their mixed feelings on Gone With the Wind which offers nuance and insight on the good and the bad. It helps to keep tongue in cheek, people, really, it does. (ps- I can't believe I f***ing missed Five Graves to Cairo AGAIN!) Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Aug 1, 2011 10:46 AM

> {quote:title=scsu1975 wrote:}{quote}The main difference is that, with Bacall, I can't wait for her to appear in a scene. With Scott, I can't wait for her to get out of one. That's hilarious and I can't agree with you more. Lizabeth Scott is an awful actress who never improved and comes darn close to ruining Martha Ivers - an otherwise inn-teresting film. Bacall started out really, really strong with Big Sleep and To Have and Have Not and then faltered a bit (there's a 1946 film she made with Charles Boyer that she's not very good in) but she is amazingly confident for someone who started to young (18!) and with such big names at a big studio. It is to note that Scott's career was ruined by Confidential magazine, which exposed her as a lesbian. She wanted to sue for defamation, but couldn't as the mag was not based in California. (this is all per the excellent book Dark City: A History of Film Noir by Eddie Muller.

> {quote:title=finance wrote:}{quote}Noir sets are known for being cheap-looking and claustrophobic. This isn't a Vincente Minnelli musical. Really? And I was so hoping a be-Leiderhosened Gene Kelly and Van Johnson would come tap-dancing though singing The Changing O' The Guard or that Margaret O'Brien would do the cakewalk, then be strangled in a booze-fueled rage by Bogart ( that I would love to see!) You are so right about noir sets being cheap-looking and claustrophobic though...oh wait, except for Laura , Sunset Blvd. , Double Indeminity , White Heat , Martha Ivers , Sorry Wrong Number , Mildred Pierce , Leave Her to Heaven (yes, I count it as noir ) , The Big Sleep , Out of The Past , The Killers , and Desert Fury Some of those sets may be of cheap places, but the sets themselves aren't cheap looking. In In A Lonely Place they just look bland and cheap to me- and all those iron bars (WHICH YES, I TOTAL GET ARE MEANT TO SYMBOLIZE A PRISON) are tacky. But then again every time I complain about a set being claustrophobic or cheap ( Whatever Happened to Baby Jane comes to mind) I always add a disclaimer to say "I'm sure that's what the director intended" and yet someone always feels the need to reply to me that "you simp, that is what the director intended. Here's a peace of ribbon candy and a pat on the head for you, back to the basement with you." I likes what I like, I thinks what I think, and I knows what I don't like and I think the sets in Lonely Place look ******, cheap, and small. (Of course, I'm sure that's what Ray intended.)

> {quote:title=skimpole wrote:}{quote} Meanwhile today E! Channel ran Sense and Sensibility a 136 minute movie in a two hour time slot with plenty of commercials. OH MY GOD! E! actually had 136 Kardashian-free minutes and I missed it! (I'm not entirely sure I believe this.) damn

> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote} > > JohnnyGeetar, was it you who said you couldn't abide *In a Lonely Place* ? > Yes it was...Although "can't abide" is a little strong. On a scale of one to four stars, I'd give it two and a half. Not only do the voiceovers not work for me, I find the end to be a trifle anti-climactic, the sets to be cheap-looking and claustrophobic (I know, I know that was probably budget-dictated and Ray's choice, but I still don't like it even if it is a nit-pick.) the supporting characters are really weak and most of all... WARNING! SPOILERS IN REGARDS TO "IN A LONELY PLACE", DO NOT READ IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN IT! That ending is stupid. The film itself it ostensibly a murdery mystery, and then that "mystery" is solved OFFSCREEN and revealed in one little line of dialogue in the end. It's like an anti-mystery, the mystery is no mystery at all, only it's not as amusing as it was in Gosford Park The whole film is a cheat, it keeps telling us over and over again that Dix did it then, oh no, he didn't: it was a minor, almost nonexistant, character who was in one scene at the beginning. Thank you, good night and good luck. Reminds me rather of Suspicion or, even moreso, this really stupid movie with Nancy Davis (later Reagan) about a boy whose dog is killed and the whole movie tells us it was his creepy, Boo Radley-esque neighbor who did it only in the end it's: "oh no, the dog ate mole poison, our bad- the filmakers." Some people, of course, enjoy this about the film: it shows what jealousy and suspicion do to the human mind and reveals that, killer or not, Dix is no prince. Me: I just think it's stupid and a cheat. Combined with the lameness of the voiceovers, I just do not, and cannot, dig In A Lonely Place That said, Grahame and (especially) Bogart gave performances worthy of Oscar nominations, in fact, I cannot think of another performance in 1950 that is superior to Bogey in this movie. Kirk Douglas always gets credit for being the cimena's #1 heel. Uh-uh, it's Bogart all the way. Eddie Muller (sic?) gives an excellent write-up of Lonely Place in his terrific book Dark City: The History of Film Noir . He draws a parallel between the film and the troubled relationship of Bogart and his first wife Mayo Methot (sic?) who committed suicide around the same time Lonely Place was released. I can't think of any other film I have wanted to like more, but from the first time I saw it years ago to my last attempted viewing it's no dice for me and Lonely Place

> {quote:title=scsu1975 wrote:}{quote} > > Joan Collins's film career never attained liftoff. > But plenty of her co-stars achieved exactly that. Tee-hee, tee-hee. They don't call her "The British Open" for nuthin'.

Argle bargle! Fooferall! If any one of us spent five minutes with most Hollywood people (actors, directors, screenwriters) responsible for making some of our favorite classic films, or if we knew the whole story (whatever that is), it'd be hard to like anything They're were and are nearly all jerks, egomaniacs, amoral **** or brick-stupid- it's how they got to the top of the heap. It's the finished product that matters, and in the case of Ray, his films have stood the test of time really, really well.

> {quote:title=Filmgoddess wrote:}{quote} > This thread makes absolutely no sense. And yet ye have come down from the mountain top to reply to it not once, but three times in a row. How gracious of you.

> {quote:title=FredCDobbs wrote:}{quote}I think the whole point of the film is to show some fundamental information about how the ancient Egyptians constructed the great pyramids, and what those Egyptians were really like. yes, and yet I had the nagging feeling that maybe, just maybe, this film was not, um, entirely accurate in its depiction of that. but oh well. Anyone know how they did the scene with the kid and the cobra? That was really effective and it scared the s#@# out of me. According to imdb, this thing cost $3,000,000 and made less than $1,500,000 which was a big ole' floparoo in those days. Hawks didn't do another movie for 4 years and I guess it helps explain (at least in part) why Joan Collins's film career never attained liftoff. Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Jul 26, 2011 9:19 AM

> {quote:title=MovieMadness wrote:}{quote}Too bad this movie was not shown in Arab Images on Film, I thought they did a fair job on the mysteries of Pyramids and Egypt. I know, right? I guess 'cause Bob and Bing didn't show up to make fun of the Pharoah's guard and no nuns are killed that Professor Shaheen (sic?) couldn't work himself up into enough of an indignant hissy fit over the inequity of it all. It would've fit in with the month perfectly. Inn-teresting film, surprisingly big-budget visuals minus the big-budget stars, although Jack Hawkins was totally miscast as the Pharoah, the heavily bronzed Joan Collins (made up a lot like Joan Crawford in the Two-Faced Woman number from Torch Song ) turns the whole thing into Alexis Does Egypt or maybe Ancient Dynasty

They constantly pick the stupidest titles for Essentials Jr. Not just this year's crop, but for the last three years. The films are (mostly) fine (albeit culled from the repeated repeated repeated list of "Essentials" already in heavy rotation), but VERY FEW of them would I honestly pick as something to sit some ADD-riddled, MTV-drunk, videogame-addled, sugar-popped modern day kid to see. And then this new guy (who breasts the tape with Ben Mankiewicz when it comes to sheer charismalessness) ends each film by throwing out a bunch of esoteric facts no kid on earth cares about. At least it's better than last year when Lithgow showed To Have and Have Not . I am 33 and only recently have I been able to make it through that one.

The thing I really don't like about In A Lonely Place is the voiceovers- not even voiceovers, they're like the characters thinking out loud- it is SUCH sloppy technique, very soap opera, and it reminds me of a bad coffee commercial from the 1950's: "Hmmm: Dix never tries to strangle me after his second cup of coffee..." It also doesn;t help that I read the book (by Dorothy Sayers?) that Lonely Place was based on before I saw the movie and it SUCKS (very dark and dismal, surprisingly brutal for a female author too.) Of course, the only thing the book has in common with the movie is the (great) title- NOTHING else (still the experience left me iffy to start off.) They were very smart to shift the setting to Hollywood. but THAT ENDING! Oy! It does not fit the whole arc of the movie. (And I won't spoil it for those of you who haven't seen it.) Lonely Place does have one of the BEST lines ever (PARAPHRASING FROM MEMORY HERE:): "I was born when she kissed me, I lived a few weeks while she loved me, I died when she left me." I just wish the movie was as good as that line. As much as I love noir , Ray, Bogart and Grahame, I wish I could love Lonely Place but I do not and never have and I've seen it over five times (at least.) Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Jul 24, 2011 9:21 PM Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Jul 24, 2011 9:22 PM

> {quote:title=redriver wrote:}{quote}Some darn good movies there! And quite a few I haven't seen. > to this day, I haven't seen JOHNNY GUITAR. How that much talked about western continues to elude me, I don't know! Ah, a Guitar virgin...Alls I can say is DVR or tape it, because it really requires multiple viewings (and a lot of patience for the first 15 minutes.) It is an acquired taste, much like olives. The first time I tried to watch it, I quit. But the second time it clicked (same thing happened with Dr. Strangelove ) It is f***ing nuts! The Lusty Men is really terrific, so is Bigger than Life which was James Mason's big self-produced effort after he got an Oscar nomination for A Star is Born (the second is way ahead of its time.) Speaking of ahead of it's time: I saw They Live By Night for the first time just a few weeks ago on TCM, it is stunningly good. (My only complaint is that stupid title, why they didn't go with the original name Theives Like Us is beyond me, 'specially since it's so easy to confuse with They Drive By Night the inferior Bogart/Lupino trucking drama from the late thirties.) But from what I've read, RKO legendarily screwed up the release, delaying it by two or three years. Sue me though: I don't like In a Lonely Place. I've always wanted to: but no dice. Doesn't click with me, and I'm glad they're skipping Macao: it's on too much as it is. (No complaints about Gloria Grahame or Jane Russell tho'.) Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Jul 23, 2011 8:08 PM

yes, out of all of the male vocalists, I think Chet Baker is my favorite- which is strange because he doesn't have as many recordings as the others and his vocal range was limited, especially compared to Nat King Cole and Eckstein...But I just love his stuff. Another irony is that, to have made such beautiful music, Baker apparently led a rather dark and ugly life.

I do have to say props go to Mr. Osborne for unapolgetically loving what he loves, and it was certainly an inn-teresting exchange between him and the professor before the start to Road to Morroco . I also enjoy how TCM shows movies without removing the (let's just say "dated") material that shows us just how far we've come as society. That said, I've never seen Road to Morroco and I turned it off some 20 minutes in. It was during the part where Crosby gives Hope a lesson on how to speak Arabic and it went something like "DUNG DUNG DOING-DUH DUMDUM, DUH-DUH-DUH, AND THUM'O'DOSE AND THUM'O'DOSE AND THUM'O'DOSE TOO." Yeah, that was some stupid s***. Don't go to another country and insult the people, period. And that was insulting as hell. FULL DISCLOSURE: Bob Hope makes me want to wretch. I like Crosby all right, but he sometimes looks like he thinks he's just too damn cool for the room. I don't like any of the Road movies, although I get why some people do (they have their moments.) I personally wish they would all end with the principles getting trench mouth and being executed by a firing squad, but that's just me. Like I said, I changed the channel and we all lived to see today.

If anyone gets the chance to see any of the episodes of The Loretta Young Show : do so. It is some of the campiest s*** I have ever seen. They may be on youtube, I dunno. I came across them years ago on one of those weirdo borderline public access channels where they show informercials and old Gladiator movies and episodes of The A-Team . You could even order them as a boxed set on DVD. Hee-lair-ee-ous. Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Jul 14, 2011 1:19 PM

"Painful" maybe isn't the right word...I just remember coming across some of her later stuff and fiiin-ding iiiiiit a li-hi-hi-hi-hi-hi-ttle o-ho-ho-hooooooverduh-uh-uh-uh-hun, also the song choices weren't my taste i.e. Send in the Clowns . However, it's been a long time since I've listened to those, maybe I'd change my mind if I heard it now. And I'll say it again: You're Mine, You by SV is such a great record, for anyone who doesn't have it: GET IT. Great version of Maria from West Side Story and rollicking versions of Mama, He Treats Your Daughter Mean! and One Mint Julip And hey: I'll take Sarah Vaughan overdoing it over Bebe and Cece Wynans overdoing it or Whitney Houston overdoing it any day of the week. And I'll take her (for good or bad) meandering delivery over some of the weirdassed, head-scratching arrangements Nina Simone sings to (like doing Rogers and Hart's Little Boy Blue with no other accompaniment besides Greensleeves being played on a xylophone. I have NO idea what they were smoking that day. ) ps- Betty Carter is the one that I TOTALLY DON'T GET. She's painful!