JonnyGeetar
-
Posts
1,118 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by JonnyGeetar
-
-
> {quote:title=Hibi wrote:}{quote}The film is overwrought from the very first frames (that laughable prologue) and never lets up. Director Vidor directs at fever pitch (a companion piece to his The Fountainhead made around the same time).......None of the films she did during this period were much better.......
Will you please stop teasing me by describing this big, double-dutch, triple-frosted, Devil's food cupcake that I cannot touch, see, or taste?
As to the last sentence of your quote, Winter Meeting, a comedy somewhat in the vein of Christmas in Connecticut that she did with Robert Montgomery circa 1948, was on TCM a little while ago. It was pretty funny, although her role is nothing exciting; and Deception, while something of a retread of her previous triumphs, is entertaining and stylish (it's also one of Claude Rains' best performances.)
When you had a winning streak like Bette had between 1934 and 1944, it's hard to ever do anything that's "as good" as those movies.
-
> {quote:title=Hibi wrote:}{quote} It doesnt help she wears a very unbecoming fright wig throughout the picture
No, I wouldn't say "fright wig." "A shoulder-length Cher/Morticia Addams" or "a late-sixties Tina Turner" would be more apt for the wig in question. I also toss in that poisonally, I don't think it's entirely unbecoming, in what tragically ittle I've been able to see of the film.
Forest rates very high on my desire-to-see-ometer, up there with Letty Linton and London After Midnight . Athough I throw in that, perhaps, sometimes we need things in life to be our Holy Grail, and should we ever be able to answer the questions three and cross the moat and fend off the killer rabbit and we actually get to hold The Cup in our hands for an hour-and-a-half, we might quite possibly walk away from the experience and say "meh"
For years, a film very high on my "lost classics to be seen" list was Joan Crawford's 1955 follow-up to Johnny Guitar: Female on the Beach aka. No Close-ups After Five. Recently I was finally able to see it.
Final verdict: meh.
A lot of people have said that if we got the chance to see London After Midnight wes think it was silly. I know when TCM trotted out The Constant Nymph recently, the lengthy and popular thread had a lot of entries for people who were, perhaps, a little let down.
Nonetheless: THANK YOU FOR SHOWING US THE CONSTANT NYMPH, TCM.
(Anyone wonder if maybe the title The Constant Nymph is what led to it's being sealed away for all those years in some sort of vaguely-humorous misunderstanding that was too difficult to explain to dim-witted, overly-moralistic people whose minds, nonetheless, remain in the gutter at all times?)
ps- Max Steiner's score was one of only three "Best Score" nominations by the Academy that year.
Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Feb 9, 2012 10:44 AM
Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Feb 9, 2012 10:52 AM
Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Feb 9, 2012 10:55 AM
-
S'okay. There's no prize or anything, but you are correct, sir.
-
I'm not sure whether or not Decision Before Dawn has been shown before, but I feel like the intro/outro missed an interesting trivia tidbit in neglecting to mention that- between 1951 and 2009*- only two films have been nominated for Best Picture while recieving only one other nomination.
Anyone know the other one is?
*since they (stupidly) changed the rules to allow any number of films to be nominated for Best Picture, there may be more answers to this now.
Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Feb 8, 2012 9:16 AM
-
Thanks for taking the time to do that. I appreciate it.
I do have to note that it seems funny to me that some of these inn-teresting premieres (ie The Invisible Woman - which sparked quite a discussion thread- and the inn-teresting Holy Matrimony with Monty Wooley and a rare 40's screen appearance by Gracie Fields) were not given prime time premieres.
Guess they didn't fit in with the whole "geography theme."
Anyway, again, thanks.
-
Thank you, Mr. X. and Mr R. Another of life's mysteries solved.
-
Dear God yes, you hit it.
If ever there should have been a studio meeting where it was decided to wrest control of a film away from the young, maverick director this was it. And even if they renamed the character "Karl" and badly dubbed it in Japanese-monster-movie style, and when the characters say "Karl" you can clearly see their mouths saying "Berry-Berry" it would be a thousand times better than having to listen to the endless "Berry-Berry"ing that goes on throughout the entirety All Fall Down.
For the raging substance abusers among you, may I suggest the All Fall Down Drinking/ Bong Hit Game a.k.a. All Fall Down Within Ten Minutes ? You take a shot (or whatever) every time a character says the words, well- you know.
(Don't blame me if you have to call the ambulance.)
P.S.-Isn't Berri-Berri some kind of Japanese food poisoning or something?
-
A very well-thought and researched OP. Although I do have to say that the film you refer to as Ruby from 1953 is, I believe, Ruby Gentry from 1952. It's a fun film with a wonderful bad-girl turn from Jennifer Jones and one that I always enjoy seeing as it is set in me home state of North Carolina.
However: I'm getting to the point where I think that TCM will formulate any possible excuse to show the film *All Fall Down* for any reason whatsoever. I fully expect both Eva Marie Saint and Beatty Star of the Month turns, possibly an inclusion for both in SUTS, a "Directed by John Frankenheimer" theme night, a day of films with the word "fall" in the title, and when the sad day that Angela Lansbury passes from the mortal coil, comes you can bet your damn bippy the trib will lead off with Gaslight and All Fall Down.
Why the hell do you love this film so much TCM? Yes, it's well-acted and has a good cast (props to Brandon DeWilde (sic?)), but *kee-ripes:* it is such a tedious, overwrought, mundane little affair- and honestly, it's been in heavy rotation for the last two or three years.
I thank the good Lord it wasn't nominated for any Oscars.
Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Feb 6, 2012 10:18 AM
-
it's on again today.
-
> {quote:title=mr6666 wrote:}{quote}-Keeping in mind they are airing *27 premieres* this month also.
>
what are some of the new titles?
-
> {quote:title=Hibi wrote:}{quote}Never fear. LOL. Guess (North by Northwest) was nominated for something.........
Yes, the brilliant script by Ernest Lehman and the ace editing by George Tomasini were most deservedly nominated.
See TCM? This is what happens when you lean so heavily on titles- even if they are great
There comes a point when you just suck the marrow from something- you make it a lot less special when it pops up so much- and so often in prime time, weekends, the 6:00 pm slot, and under the ostensible banner of a theme night or month.
What few faults the film may have become glaringly obvious the ninth time it's on that year* and we end up viewing something which we should look forward to seeing with contempt and in some cases outright loathing.
And a lot of these films don't deserve it....
*ie: the deliberate violation of the laws of space and time in the last fifteen minutes during the climactic chase scene in Some Like it Hot. are kind of sloppy and weak.
Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Feb 2, 2012 7:33 PM
-
> {quote:title=casablancalover wrote:}{quote}Ah, Jonny, I pulled my copy down; it does allude to Rochester's damaged limb, . A pox upon me..
S'allright.
Something I found a trifle hard to swallow in the novel, and vicariously in the film version is WHY THE HELL DOES ROCHESTER TRY TO SAVE THIS DROOLING LUNATIC WHO HAS RUINED HIS LIFE, TRIED TO KILL HIM, DRIVEN HIS LOVE AWAY, CHAINED HIM FOR LIFE AND IS APPARENTLY SOMETHING OF A BITER AS WELL????
I mean, I know there's this noble idea of chivalry and the British idea of "doing the decent thing and all, you know" but KEE-RIPES, here she is: dancing on the edge of the ledge, forty feet up, flames all around her, nutty as a Stuckey's log and howling at the moon. If ever there was a gift from God with a big bright bow wrapped around it- this is it.
For the love of God man: let her fall. I don't think anyone would think the worse of you for it.
Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Feb 1, 2012 8:44 AM
-
> {quote:title=casablancalover wrote:}{quote}No. Their child doesn't grow up to fight in the US Civil War either. I can't be the only one who's read this?
As Groucho Marx said to Margaret Dumont: "Why must you bring the Civil War into it?"
From the wikipedia synopsis of Jane Eyre: She learns that Mr. Rochester's wife set the house on fire and committed suicide by jumping from the roof. In his rescue attempts, *Mr. Rochester lost a hand* and his eyesight
-
I thought Rochester lost an eye and a hand (arm?) in the fire at the end of the book..
-
it was a very interestingly put-together film, especially in the first half-hour, where I thought there were some really clever moments in the editing- balancing the story between the sailor on the sea and the nefarious doings in London.
I saw something of an inspiration for Snidely Whiplash in Slaughter's performance, the whole thing was such penny-dreadful, matinee-performance fun, AND I MEAN THAT IN THE NICEST WAY!
Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Jan 31, 2012 4:10 PM
-
> {quote:title=Hibi wrote:}{quote}I havent read the novel for many years, but it seemed to me like they sugar coated the ending for the film in the narration wrap up. I seem to remember the novel ended on a more somber note...
>
> NOTE: I seem to be having some difficulties in writing something outside of the space reserved for quotes.
>
> The novel has one of the most famous closing lines in history, and I paraphrase it here (in all likelihood inaccurately)
>
> "What did I do then? Dear reader, I married him."
-
> {quote:title=smileys wrote:}{quote}So I was too busy enjoying the beautiful uncut picture to be noticing any discrepancies with the score. I'm thrilled that TCM finally got their hands on *Jane Eyre* after six-plus years of my begging for it. Thanks, TCM! :-)
I'm with you...although I didn't think the picture quality was that great, it's soitanly better than the one I tried to watch on u-yay ube-tay some months ago. There probably isn't a really good, clean print of this thing out there anywhere...At least until someone whips out the Q-Tips and Windex or does whatever the hell it is you do to clean old film stock. (Shop Vac? Soak it in Simple Green for an hour?)
In nearly any case I'd rather be able to see a film period, even if there are issues with the sound, print quality , etc. which I realize drives something of a wedge between me and some of the Film Freak Purists out there, and I get where you all come from- I really do. (If it makes you feel better, I'm rabidly ANTI "edited for content or to fit the slot alotted" and Pan-and-scan altogether.
In ending I'd like to say that I think it is a testement to YE STAR QUALITY of FONTAINE and ORSON WELLES in all his rich-voiced, shadow-drenched-jowled, moody S.O.B, pre-350 pound glory that transcended any issues with the print/sound/score and I thoroughly enjoyed watching the two of them go at it in what is a story that is so open to interpretation it finally dawned on me last night why it is remade every 10 years (or so.) (Heretofore I just assumed that there was some kind of contract with the Bronte estate or it was a code for "tax write off" or something.)
Thanks TCM
-
> Finance wrote:
> From the comments on these boards over the years, I believe that REBECCA is just about everyone's favorite Fontaine performance{color:black}.
>
> {quote:title=wouldbestar wrote:}{quote}{font:Times New Roman} {font}
> {color:black}Not mine; it's *Jane Eyre* which is on tonight.
>
>
>
> And not mine either. That would be Letter From an Unknown Woman which was on a few days ago.
>
Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Jan 30, 2012 8:47 PM
-
> {quote:title=Hibi wrote:}{quote}LOL. I guess he was, Jonny (Hughes) He directed most of their episodes.
>
> Didnt know Johanna and the sailor (cant remember HIS name now...) were married. Loved him, not so much her.
>
When Betty White won her Emmy for the 1st season of Golden Girls, in her speech, she referred to Terry Hughes as "the fifth Golden Girl" which drew something of a gasp from the audience. But she went on to credit him with much of the success of the show.
Johanna and George Hearn were married, not Johanna and the sailor. Obviously from some previous comments, I agree with you about the actress playing the ingenue- she was an ELEVEN with the OPERATIC SINGING and the HAND GESTURES and the ACTING! That's one of the things about Broadway that kind of gets on my nerves...but what was nice was that everyone else in the show wasn't OUT THERE GIVING IT AN ELEVEN, their work- while nutty- had some restraint.
The only part where I felt like Johanna (may as well call her that) was on the mark (or at least her spazziness fit) is the scene where she and the sailor flee the asylum after she has shot the Eeeeeeevil Doctor (ostensibly because she figured she was the only one allowed to gnaw the scenery.) She's all singing about her trousseau and where they'll honeymoon and he's all like "you just SHOT a guy."
Kind of shows that her kooky lineage may be something to come back to haunt them in the future.
ps- checked out the 1936 version of Sweeney on youtube last night. Bad print, but interesting in it's own way and worth checking out.
-
> {quote:title=Hibi wrote:}{quote}Terry Hughes. (directed it)
Ah, the "fifth Golden Girl. " A master in the Biddie Genre.
I imdb'ed the 1982 Sweeney Todd TV presentation and found 2 interesting bits of trivia:
1.Lansbury was nominated for the Emmy for Best Actress in a TV Special (or something of the like) for this and lost. Her costar who played Sweeney (whose name I ironically and genuinely forget) won. These Emmys were, according to imdb, awarded in 1984 (I know not why.)
2. The guy who played Sweeney and the gal who played Johanna were married when they did this. They divorced in 1985. (I suspect that her love of spontaneously bursting into overly enthusiastic librettos replete with jazz hands and little to no warning contributed to the demise of the marriage, but have no evidence.)
Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Jan 29, 2012 3:28 PM
Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Jan 29, 2012 3:30 PM
-
In his review of Phantom of the Rue Morgue which aired this morning, Maltin said he found Karl Malden "hammy." I don't agree.
The whole thing was a tacky attempt to top Horror of the Wax Museum, Malden was actually rather restrained for most of it.
So he's 0 for 2 in my book, even if the Rocky thing isn't his fault.
-
> {quote:title=aimalac wrote:}{quote}If TCM could show this, how about showing "Superman", a 1975 TV movie of the Broadway play that ran from 3/29/66 to 7/17/66. Among it's stars are David Wayne, Lesley Ann Warren, Loretta Swit, Kenneth Mars, Harvey Lembeck and Michael Lembeck. It is also known as "It's A Bird...It's A Plane...It's Superman". To me, this would fit perfectly for TCM's Underground Programming feature because of it's 'campiness' (is that a word?) .
Yes, "campiness" is a word. However, I'd offer *AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!* as more the mot just for that particular endeavor.
Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Jan 27, 2012 1:44 PM
-
> {quote:title=kriegerg69 wrote:}{quote}Back in the late 70's and early 80's, Showtime also had "Broadway On Showtime", which presented videotaped (not filmed ) presentations of stage plays,
Showtime's been around that long?
Yes, taped- not filmed, my bad on that- but you reminded me of something I meant to mention in me last post- which was that the taping of the Sweeney Todd performance was really well done. The shots, the editing, the clever close-ups of the razor- it was very compelling- not just because of the quality of the show, the composition of the shots had a lot to do with it as well.
Whoever directed and edited this thing really did a really good job.
-
I remember back in the eighties, HBO used to show filmed stage plays a lot in their schedule and there were several that my sister and I enjoyed watching (I seem to recall one production of Wait Until Dark. and I think one of Camelot too)
Thusly, I gots no problem with TCM morphing into Turner Classic Theatuh, and last night's programming beat an encore encore encore of Gaslight.
I started watching the filmed play last night, expecting to lose interest by the halfway mark: I ended up staying to the (literal) bitter end, and enjoying it quite a bit.
I always thought Lansbury was a vocalist in the same sense as Bea Arthur or Rex Harrison- entertaining singers who didn't really sang or had limited range. I did not realize until last night that she had such a magnificent set of brassy pipes- she was throughly up to the score in all measures. Just a wonderful performance, and I'm sure many of you noted who got the last bow (hint: it wasn't the title character)
Aside from that, I thought the sets were a little cheap (I guess with that book and that score and that cast they felt it didn't need an elaborate set, but it looked a trifle High School Production in quality) I think it would have been a good deal more effective if they had cast an actual child in the role of the child (although I totally get why they couldn't) and I think the gal playing Johanna would have helped the overall production if she had turned it down to a seven.
But nonetheless, I liked it very much.
Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Jan 26, 2012 9:55 PM
Why You'll Never See Bette's Greatest Performance on TCM
in Hot Topics
Posted
> {quote:title=finance wrote:}{quote}When Crawford came to WB, she began to steal Davis' thunder. It coincided with Davis' decline at that studio. No wonder they didn't get along.
That and, perhaps, they had a lot more in common than either would ever admit.
In the great Joan v. Bette debates, I often bring up Flamingo Road and The Damned Don't Cry as good examples of Joan trumping Bette. As with Davis in Beyond the Forest, here is a leading lady a leetle past her sell-by date, forced to take on a pair of roles for which she is far too old in vehicles that are a wee on the tawdry side.
And yet, Joan shows a level of commitment (delusion?) to the parts for which she was not entirely well-suited and wins against the odds, whereas I get the sense Bette spends most of Forest quite visibly giving Jack Warner the finger.