JonnyGeetar
-
Posts
1,118 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by JonnyGeetar
-
-
1. 1937: LOUISE RAINER, THE GOOD EARTH. I think she?s still alive, so I?m sorry, Louise, but the fact that you beat the three BEST actresses of the ?30?s who NEVER WON, Garbo, Dunne, and Stanwyck just sticks in my craw. And anyone who can watch the scene where she teaches her kids how to beg alms without cringing is born without the cringe reflex.
2. 1954: GRACE KELLY, THE COUNTRY GIRL- This is a wound I opened last month when Kelly was Star of the Month. I?ll just say it?s not because I dislike Kelly (which I do) but because I despise THE COUNTRY GIRL, and Judy Garland gave the best performance EVER in A STAR IS BORN, and I really don?t want to get a bunch of nine-page replies from people being all ?oh, it was about how the industry viewed Judy and how they viewed Grace and blah-blah-blah.? Garland Rules, Kelly Drools!
3. 1996: FRANCES MACDORMAND, FARGO. Another movie I stand alone in my loathing of. It?s a one-note performance and, at half-an-hour of screen time, A SUPPORTING ROLE!
4. 1997: HELEN HUNT, AS GOOD AS IT GETS this one?s gonna be a popular choice, I think.
5. 1947: LORETTA YOUNG- THE FARMER?S DAUGHTER I like Loretta, but this thing! Eeesh!
6. 1952: HAZEL, COME BACK, LITTLE SHEBA- ?Nuff said.
7. 2000: HALLE BERRY, MONSTER?S BALL She?s not a bad actress, but this is the worst movie to EVER win a major Oscar. Ever.
8. 1950: JUDY HOLIDAY, BORN YESTERDAY- This is the best turn of the lot, I LOVE Judy Holiday and am glad she won an Oscar some time in her all-too-brief life, but it should have been for THE MARRYING KIND and Gloria Swanson should?ve taken it hands down this year.
9. 1998: PRINCESS GWINNIEKINS PALTROW- SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE Again, ?nuff said.
10. 1959: SIMONE SIGNORET - ROOM AT THE TOP Another actress I like, but what the hell did she win for? There?s nothing to it, And Monroe was better in SOME LIKE IT HOT and I think Liz Taylor is astounding in the otherwise campy SUDDENLY, LAST SUMMER.
Honorable mention goes to Glenda Jackson in A TOUCH OF CLASS, I've never seen it, but I've heard it sinks something awful.
-
I ?m sure in the annals of the message boards, there are many much like this, but what the hey? it?s a free country?kind of.
Hollywood?s annual Let?s Get Everything as Wrong as We Possibly Can Festival, aka The Academy Awards are more or less around the corner- God help us all.
I would say in their history- there have been spells of Mescaline Jell-O-induced madness (the 50?s, the more recent years) as well as brief spurts of kinda-sorta getting it right, (1939-46, and moments in the ?60?s and ?70?s.)
All in all, I?d say they?re wrong about 90% of the time?
And I?m not even counting the instances where someone who was fine won and someone who was better lost- I mean the times where there were four perfectly decent performances and the LOUSIEST of the lot walked away with the gong. Kind of like when Holly Hunter won in 1993.
That?s right, I said it.
If this goes okay, a follow-up series for PICTURE, ACTOR, SONG, and SUPPORTINGS may follow?.If not, I can only expect Robert Osborne and some of his goons on my front doorstep, wielding socks stuffed with oranges a? la? The Grifters.
This post will be followed by my selections, and I WELCOME debate and can?t wait to hear what the rest of you come up with.
-
this is a great post! i am stunned more people have not replied to it.
maybe it's because you picked one of the less contentious Best Actress Races, had ye p'raps selected 1937, 1947, 1954, or 1960- things would've been hotter post-wise.
i am so happy to see someone else thinks BABY DOLL is a hot mess too. THE RAINMAKER was on a coupla' days ago...It's a wee tedious, but Kate really does things in it I haven't seen her do anywhere else, save maybe her early days. THE BAD SEED is trash though, sorry.
As far as the results of '56 go, I'm kosher with Bergman. It's one of those rare instances where I think the ACTOR merits recognition more than the PERFORMANCE (although she is terrific.) It was just so right and so dramatic and so apt that Bergman was welcomed back into the fold and became a deserving member of "the two-timers club."
Best Actor and Picture in 1956 are, in my opinion, FAR more open to debate.
-
> {quote:title=Fedya wrote:}{quote}
> May we talk about *Joan* Crawford's nostrils instead? ;-)
permission is granted and discussion of Joan Crawford, her nostrils and other other bits of her anatomy are welcome in any thread, any time. she is the gaseous orb around which all TCM discussions should revolve.
Joan Crawford's nostrils were, in fact, the basis for the selection of my screen name. If not for their existence, I would have been "KissMeDeadly" instead.
-
...and for the record, a dumpy butt does not mean a bad actor. Spencer Tracy: great actor, dumpy butt (from 1950 on at least.) Robert Ryan, good actor, and ripped from the equator on up, but a dumpy butt. John Wayne, Van Heflin, Sterling Hayden...You see where I'm going with this.
I think there was just something about all those steak and martini lunches and dinners back in the day, and of course the pounds and pounds of butter consumed as well.
I'd take any one of 'em over some of these guys nowadays: magnificent butts, but no range.
-
i feel guilty.
i did not mean for this thread to be all about dumpy butts...
i recently underwent a self-imposed Bette Davis filme festival focusing entirely on her 1939-1942 Warners releases: THE OLD MAID, DARK VICTORY, ALL THIS AND HEAVEN TOO, OLD AQUAINTANCE, IN THIS OUR LIFE, a few others too.
I thought about posting a thread on OLD AQUAINTANCE, and its many, many, many story problems, as well as some issues I have with Vincent Sherman's direction. I was going to call it "SHOULD OLD ACQUAINTANCE BE FORGOT?" Good, huh?
Then I thought about a post challenging anyone to name a child performance worse than that given by the little boy in (the otherwise very good) ALL THIS, AND HEAVEN TOO: seriously he's baaaaaad.
Then it occurred to me that the biggest cog in everything (except the Brent-less HEAVEN) was George Brent.
I'm sorry, he just stinks something awful in all four: not a whiff of charisma for a nanosecond and why Davis and DeHavilland or Davis and Hopkins would spend an hour and a half battling over this heavily Pom-Aided non-entity is beyond me: thus the whole driving conflict of the films and thus the films themselves are put on shaky ground.
Which brings me to the dumpy butt.
Seriously, watch DARK VICTORY. It's the last quarter of the film, you know the lights are gonna start to dim soon and the gravitas is thick in the air. Then Brent gets up from behind his desk and his giant **** just wipes everything out, like the boat tipping over in THE POSIEDON ADVENTURE. It's distracting.
There. I hope that puts an end to all this dumpy butt talk.
Although, I will point out that Broderick Crawford had a really, really dumpy can too.
-
maybe a controversial choice, but: CHINATOWN (1974)- It perfectly sums up what film noir is all about and brings the theme of the story brilliantly full circle (when in Chinatown, it's better to do nothing.) Plus a touch of Greek tragedy.
-
not meaning to divert from the Brent V. Raft debate, but: i also have read "all the king's men"- it is one of my favorite american novels ever.
...unfortunately I think the movie really, really misses the mark in a lot of ways and- sorry- I just think Crawford is -well- not good in it. I don't think the film encapsulates the "southern" sensibility of the novel and Brod's perf is all bellowing and nostril flaring- basically what he did in "born yesterday" and "deadline usa" and...well, everything else he ever did. good casting, in a way, but it's a pretty dreary and dull exercise- but I like Robert Rossen's other things.
Besides, Kirk Douglas should have won for "Champion." (just as I think Griffith should've won for "A Face In The Crowd.")
however, i am glad Mercedes MacCambridge (sic?) got an Oscar some time in her career- you are right, she is a force of nature in "Guitar" and she has one of the greatest cameo roles of all time in "touch of evil" ("lemme watch!")
Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Dec 16, 2009 10:28 AM
-
> {quote:title=faceinthecrowd wrote:}{quote}
> If you think George Brent wasn't a good actor, see JEZEBEL. And as for Broderick Crawford: ALL THE KING'S MEN.
I've seen ALL THE KING'S MEN. It was my basis for calling Crawford a lousy actor in the first place- love your screen name though, Face.
Nice to see so many folks taking up for Brent, I have to say he seems like he was probably a cool guy to sit and have a beer with...if you didn't mind getting hair dye stains on all the furniture....
-
i haven't seen the 1990 version, but i think it's safe to say that the 1952 version is better...(although don't give those imdb user ratings much cred.)
that said, i don't care for the 1952 version at all. I'm sorry!
i've sat thru it at least 3 times now and I just think it's all hack-trotting and doesn't hold together a bit in the end- and repeated viewings only point out some real problems with the denoument (study Marie Windsor's reactions when her character is alone and no one but the camera is on her- they don't make sense if she is indeed who she turns out to be.)
plus her character is too casually dismissed in the story.
that said, Windsor is awesome (as always) and McGraw is fine- I just don't buy any of it...i think because it's a B movie that not out-and-out lousy, it gets a teensy bit over-praised.
forgiveness is begged.
Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Dec 15, 2009 1:52 PM
-
As an afterthought: wouldn?t it have been an absolute laugh riot if it had been Bette Davis instead of Stanwyck?
Yen would have won that Civil War.
-
i had never seen this movie before and had always been quite intrigued by the title, which is definitely one of the more interesting of the thirties.
not a fan of capra by a long shot, but i adore stanwyck, i had kind of a hard time with this one. for the first hour i have to admit i was kind of: "what the hell is the point to this thing?"- especially when it got to the freaky dream sequence where General Yen morphs into Bela Lugosi in "White Zombie"- replete with Fritos on his fingertips.
but in the end, i found it to be the kind of morally ambiguous, not easy to pin down, neither "yes" nor "no" on any question film that Hollywood rarely makes then or now.
I can just imagine Harry Cohn, cigar dangling from lip, picture of Mussolini on the screening room wall behind him bellowing out "WHAT the F*** was this thing ABOUT???!!!"
-
> {quote:title=finance wrote:}{quote}
> Both of them gave him meaningful looks as they left the courtroom and that was it. You really missed nothing.
Yeah, finance pretty much nailed it for you.
If you really, really want, I think "the bigamist" is on dvd- which means you can netflix it.
and if you don't have netflix- get it!
-
i also enjoy the story on the "DOUBLE INDEMNITY" DVD extras about how Billy Wilder and company just could NOT find a leading man because the material was so dark and salacious. finally, they scraped the bottom of the barrel and went to George Raft.
Wilder told him the story and Raft interrupted him 2/3 of the way through and said (something to the effect of): "where's the badge scene?" Wilder was like, "do what now?" and Raft was all: "the badge! The badge! Where's the scene where the guy whips out his badge and takes the dame in to headquarters?"
Ultimately, Thank God for Fred MacMurray, you know?
-
> {quote:title=finance wrote:}{quote}
> The performance that Raft REALLY took a critical drubbing on was as the detective in BLACK WIDOW.
OH MY GOD! It is NUTS that you mentioned that! I Netflixed BLACK WIDOW the other night and it SUUUUUUUUUPER SUCKS! I pinned it to my mailbox the minute I was done with it, AND it was pouring rain at the time. TACKY, TACKY 1950'S Technicolor 2oth Century Fox TWADDLE. Tons of extras on the dvd, but Raft is awful, Van Heflin is awful, awful, and Gene Tierney is awful (poor thing),
Ginger Rogers has her moments in it though...
-
They should pick a day out of the week (preferably saturday or sunday) and call it DECADE day. Start at 8:00 am with a 20's film, then move on to the 30's, then 40's, then 50's, then 60's, then 70's, then 80's, and then, you know what? I don't mind them showing stuff from the nineties:
They can have a common thread or be potpourri, I don't care.
A SAMPLE:
The Letter (1927), The Thin Man (1934), The Maltese Falcon (1941), The Asphalt Jungle (1950), Targets (1968), Chinatown (1974), Witness (1985), LA Confidential (1997).
Of course, that's 16 hours worth of programming, so maybe they can scrap the eights and nines...
-
Yeah, again, mad props to Mr. Foxey- even punctuated to perfection!
As far as the proposed "ten worst" list, I'd have to say I'm NOT on board with most of the choices, I think Rooney, Boyer, John Wayne and Robert Ryan in particular are really GREAT actors.
I did not realize that George Brent was apparently such a red-hot ball of sexual charisma in his pre-code stuff, I will have to check those out some time in March.
I still say he got a dumpy butt. Check it out the next time they show DARK VICTORY, Hey! Bette! You're not going blind! It's just George Brent's giant, dumpy butt eclipsing the sun!
My point being: Robert Taylor wasn't exactly Chekhov material either, but hey, he hit the gym on occasion.
And we also haven't taken the time to beat up on Raft. I mean, really, have any of you seen MANPOWER (I think that's what it's called, it's the story about two utility pole workers battling it out over Marlene Dietrich and seriously, it's almost as hilarious as TOMORROW: THE WORLD!)
-
> {quote:title=finance wrote:}{quote}
> If they show CANDLESHOE so much, why have I never heard of it?
You must be out on the weekends a lot. CANDLESHOE is an unfortunate pairing of Helen Hayes and a young Jodie Foster during her rather androgonous manchild years. Disney film from, I think, the Watergate era. Cutesy imp/con artist moves in to British mansion.
They have shown it at least three times that I can think of in as many months, ALWAYS on Sunday. It's not a problem of "Gaslight" level proportions, but every time I see it on I cringe.
-
Calling all haters:
This is one of those "a tree falls in the woods" type of things, meant to help clear the mind, overcome insomnia, or pass the time in traffic:
Who is the worse actor: George Brent or George Raft?
Bonus: name an actor who was consistently as bad or worse in all 1940's (relatively well known and decent) cinema- I will allow Ronald Reagan and Broderick Crawford into the mix, (although I feel they are both less bad than Los Georges.)
My vote goes to Brent- if only because he comes damn close to ruining a lot of movies that would've been better with a charismatic or handsome or even competent actor in his role: "Dark Victory", "In This Our Life," "The Old Maid," "My Reputation," and "Old Acquaintance"- that last one has problems aside from his non-performance, but still, he sucks.
And he has a dumpy butt. I know that's mean, but seriously! Check it out in "Dark Victory"- he should've taken out ad space on that thing!
(Not meaning to shortchange Raft here by any means though, has anyone seen "Manpower"?, EESH!) It's just that, while a lousy actor, he at least fits in with some of the stuff he did (ie- anything where he plays a crass, brain-dead hooligan.)
And TCM is apparently "saluting" Brent in March. For what?
Discuss!
-
I want them to take an entire year WITHOUT showing:
Candleshoe
Yours, Mine and Ours
Bedknobs and Friggin' Broomsticks (SERIOUSLY!: stop)
The Facts of Life
3:10 to Yuma
High Noon
Mr. Blandings Builds his Dreamhouse
A Thousand Clowns (SERIOUSLY, SERIOUSLY: STOP!)
Escape from Witch Mountain
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (that's right, I said it)
I like "North by Northwest" though- maybe they could just bring themselves to show it once a month.
-
oh lord have mercy, i think we may be in danger of another lockdown.
leaving politics completely aside (although anyone who wants to rant about that, rant on until they lock this thread, it's your RIGHT)- my beef is more with Ben Mankiewicz right now.
I know he's only on for two minutes at the start and end of, what, 12 movies a week, but i am so tired of his callow, charisma-minus and (forgive the Scientology word choice) glib attitude i have just got to outright mute him every time he is on....oh, i also really hate the promos he does.
i guess i'm just a hater, probably jealous too- Lord knows any of us basement-dwelling, Joan Crawford fan freaks, geeks and shut-ins could be funnier and more refreshing than he is- the two things that irk me the most about THE MANK:
1.He has NEVER gotten ANY better at his job, he has NEVER told me anything I did not already know about the movie or would not have found out from searching the imdb trivia section, and, really, he is nowhere near as funny as he really seems to think he is.
2. I am seriously annoyed by the many instances in which he has basically rolled his eyes and given off this "i can't believe they're having me show this piece of crap." Some disparaging remarks he made about "johnny guitar" during a recent weekend show really ate at me. He also said that the remake of "the women" "blew"- which is true, but that's an awfully callow and crass way of stating something for someone who is supposed to be qualified enough that he rates a job in television.
oh, and "strictly poison under the gravy"? That is REALLY NOT HARD AT ALL THE UNDERSTAND, DO YOU WANT ME TO UNPACK IT FOR YOU, BENNY?
That said, I adore Robert Osborne who somehow manages to introduce "funny face" for the 1200th time and still make you think he's gonna sit right down and watch it all the way through. if there were any way he could become a head in a jar so that he could remain with the network into the post-apocalyptic future, I would be so down with that.
but THE MANK? Eh, I just wish they're scrap him entirely and save the money they have to pay him per anum to rent something other than "beach party"- which, by the way, is on AGAIN this weekend.
Bargain basement Leonard Maltin.
Period.
-
oh lord have mercy, i think we may be in danger of another lockdown.
leaving politics completely aside (although anyone who wants to rant about that, rant on until they lock this thread, it's your RIGHT)- my beef is more with Ben Mankiewicz right now.
-
> {quote:title=mr6666 wrote:}{quote}
> Although I didn't see anything disparaging, this type of thread, unfortunately does often end up in nasty confrontations, But they could've given us the courtesy of the befefit of the doubt.
>
> Also, if the web/ad folks have the time to read and lock threads, perhaps they could address many of the problems posters are still having navigating and posting on this board often mentioned in the 'tech. issues' threads.
Mr. 6666, I love you. Amen to everything you said times ten.
to note: I AM SO SICK AND TIRED OF MY EVERY SINGLE FIRST ATTEMPT TO POST A MESSAGE ALWAYS FAILING, THEN HAVING TO COPY IT, CLOSE THE WINDOW, RE-OPEN TCM.COM, RE-OPEN THE MESSAGE BOARD, THEN HAVING MY FIRST ATTEMPT TO REPLY RE-DIRECT ME TO THE MESSAGE BOARD HOME PAGE (EVERY SINGLE TIME), THAT I AM ON THE VERGE OF QUITTING POSTING ANYTHING. EVER.
Which I am sure would make everyone happy.
By the way, has the slight change in formatting on the home page made it really hard for everyone else to get to the message boards?
So, THE MANK can shoot his mouth off about whatever he likes, but apparently us plebs must be silenced if we start gettin' too uppity. Uh-huh. Real fair.
Personally, I would love it if on the weekends they started allowing TCM fans to come on and guest host.
-
what, did we make him cry?
TOP 10 STUPIDEST OSCAR WINS FOR BEST ACTRESS, 1927-the present
in General Discussions
Posted
> {quote:title=finance wrote:}{quote}
> Marilyn wasn't nominated for SOME LIKE IT HOT, was she? Was she ever nominated?
Monroe was never nominated for an Oscar and won no Honorary awards. She did win the Golden Globe for Some Like it Hot.
In Bizarro Oscar World, Monroe won the award in 1953 for Gentlemen Prefer Blondes. (Don't worry, Audrey Hepburn wins in 1967 for Two For the Road, which gives that other Hepburn nada for the (agreed) rather maudlin Guess Who's Coming To Dinner.)
Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Dec 18, 2009 1:51 PM