ValentineXavier

> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote} > But do tramps, trollops, tarts, and broads enjoy it any less than sluts? I apologize in advance for how sexist this will sound, but hey, we're discussing movies, not reality... I base these characterizations on movies, not real life. Although a dictionary will say that tramp, trollop, tart, and ****, are all synonyms for prostitute, this is my take of the nuances of these terms. Trollops and tarts are coquettish. They want to be thought of as pretty, and get attention. Sluts are more submissive, needy. They directly trade sex for food and shelter, and need a man to take care of them. A tramp is really a woman who behaves sexually more like a man, seeing what she wants, and going after it. She is more independent and assertive, even though she uses her feminine wiles to get what she wants.

I remember the first time I saw lots of things... My first Peter Sellers film, *The Mouse That Roared*, I saw in a plush, modern theater in Maracaibo, Venezuela, in 1959. I saw *Journey to the Center of the Earth* in the same theater. I saw the 1958 *The Buccaneer* in a sort of semi-outdoor theater in Maracaibo. It had a roof over the front part of the theater, and the back part, but the middle was open to the sky. No AC, that was done to make it cooler. I saw several Cinerama films, and several Disney cartoon features, in a big theater in Oklahoma City, early to mid 50s, also *The Ten Commandments*. I saw *Rodan*, *The Attack of the Crab Monsters*, and *World Without End* at another theater in OKC. A friend's father was a projectionist there, he had his birthday party there, and we saw the three films. I saw *What Ever Happened to Baby Jane*, and *Lord Love a Duck* at a theater in Mt. Pleasant Michigan, when I was in HS. I first saw *Dr. No*, and *What's New Pussycat* at the drive-in there, during the summer. I only remember seeing a few films on TV for the first time, even though I probably saw many for the first time on TV. I saw *King Kong* when I was 8. I was at an aunt's house. My mother, and aunt, went out, leaving me with an older cousin. My mother had not allowed me to see *King Kong*, saying I was too young. I was scared, but I loved it! I saw *Lawrence of Arabia* and *On the Beach* for the first time on TV, in the 60s. I saw *2001*, and *A Clockwork Orange* at the Detroit Cinerama, as first runs. I saw *Z*, and *She's Gotta Have It* at now gone local theaters, here in Ann Arbor. I saw *Star Wars*, *Star Trek: the Movie*, and *Alien*, all on opening night at the Americana Theater in Southfield, near Detroit. They had a truly humongous screen back then. I just saw *Cave of Forgotten Dreams* in 3D, at the Michigan Theater, a restored old movie house. I highly recommend that film, and it is the only film I've seen that truly HAD to be in 3D, so one can see what is being shown, accurately. I first saw *Ugetsu*, *Rashomon*, *Seven Samurai* and *Betty Boop's Sno-White* on the screens of UM campus auditoriums, presented by campus film groups. I could name many more, but I've gone on long enough!

Miss W., you missed one popular term - Gold Diggers. That one even has sort of a series.

I think I can honestly say that I never saw a Fritz Lang film I didn't like. But, there are a few I've yet to see. *The Woman on the Beach* is definitely noir, as far as I am concerned. Perhaps Bob, or his writers, think Renoir, being French, by definition can't make a noir? Doesn't make sense to me.

Well, full month schedules exist, and we can access them, it's just difficult. I don't think it should be so hard to put up some links to make it easy, as it once was.

> {quote:title=fxreyman wrote:}{quote} >The issue of the replicants, clearly a nod to the future with the idea of genetics ( an idea which was prevalent and related to the Wrath of Khan ). I haven't read P K Dick's book, but from the title, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, I'd say that the replicants, who are more or less organic robots, are as much intended as a statement about robots as genetically engineered beings (a subject also addressed in STNG). And this is the crux of why I find the film to be more than just entertainment. It's about what it is to be human, have the rights of a human, does a sentient being, which replicants clearly are, deserve rights equal to a human? Replicants really have it worse than slaves. They are slaves with an expiration date. > All of this to me represents a viewpoint that is really based in part on geo-political thought processes. Blade Runner to many people represents everything that is bad about America. The greed, the corporate welfare state, the climate change debate, the breakdown of the American family, the genetic problems we have been facing especially towards stem cell research, and the ever growing influence of Asian culture in our everyday lives. > While I agree with this, and most of what you say about *Blade Runner*, I would point out that many, myself included, don't feel threatened by "the ever growing influence of Asian culture in our every day lives," or even see it as that much of a factor at all. But of course, some conservatives do see it as such. > And I see this as well. If you are a left-leaning individual, this movie will appeal to you. Mostly because of the way the producers have decided to show what the future will look like. If you are a more conservative individual, then *you might look at this film as an eventual reason that the breakdown of American values and cultures are being allowed to take place.* > I'm not sure I quite understand the bolded part. Do you mean that conservatives might see the existence of the film *Blade Runner* as a reason that "the breakdown of American values and culture are being allowed to take place?" If that's what you mean, I'll admit that I have a hard time believing that a film that warns against such things is seen as casual to such things. But, you could be right. People blame *Natural Born Killers* for the type of media coverage that it so clearly indicts, and finds guilty. To your point that utopian visions of the future, such as Star Trek are more appealing, and thus more entertaining, than dystopian visions such as *Blade Runner*, that is doubtless true for a lot of people. Being a film noir fan, I'm not so narrow in the tone of what I find enjoyable. I don't think that's really the reason Bill711 doesn't like *Blade Runner* either. After all, he likes, as do I, *12 Monkeys* which is in some ways even bleaker than *BR*. So, Bill711 doesn't like a highly regarded film. There are plenty of highly regarded films that I think very little of. And, my original comment, calling his omission of *BR* "heresy" was meant to be taken half in jest, as we are all entitled to our opinions on such subjective subjects.

I think a **** is a tramp that enjoys it... Seriously, I don't see much difference, but perhaps one of degree. Another term of the era was "broad." My mother, born in 1925, considered that term an insult, but I believe tramp and **** are somewhat worse.

Nurse3, that is a find! I hadn't noticed it. But, I think most of us want to display the full month's calendar, for upcoming months, not just select individual days. Have you found a way to display an entire upcoming month, like we can the May calendar?

Unless, or until, TCM schedules it, if you get MGMHD, you might keep watch on their schedule. It was on there repeatedly, a few months back. It'll probably pop up again before too long.

> {quote:title=Fedya wrote:}{quote} > Or they could just have singing cows: > That would be very mooving, indeed!

Far and away the two most disturbing films I have seen are Pasolini's *Salo, 120 Days of Sodom*, and Ken Russell's *The Devils*. Both are excellent, but both are very difficult to watch. *Salo* is probably the most powerful anti-fascist film ever made, but is is disgusting, deliberately so, in many ways. *The Devils* depicts the struggle between enlightenment and dogma. In this setting of 17th century France, dogma wins, very brutally indeed.

> {quote:title=cujas wrote:}{quote} > > Kate Hepburn needs no defense in any way. If you don't like her, you probably need to stick to War movies and Westerns. > It wouldn't help. Even if I watched nothing but war movies and westerns, until i was, well, about to puke, I still wouldn't want to see, or hear, Kate. Well, okay, except for *Undercurrent*. I'll admit I like that one, but in spite of Kate! I don't know, maybe if she had been a silent film star, I would have liked her...

Who is your cable, or satellite provider? Most likely, the anti-copy signal is coming from them. TCM doesn't include it in their transmissions. Many people around in the USA have been having a problem recording TCM from Comcast. It seems that some local headends have been adding copy protection inadvertently. They are not usually responsive to complaints about it, but it usually goes away, eventually. There are devices available to remove copy protection, and let you make anamorphic DVDs too, if you have a HDTV set. You can PM me, if you want more info.

Although I like every Lang film mentioned here, my favorite has long been *The Testament of Dr. Mabuse*. But, after seeing *Spione* for the first time, on TCM a few months back, I think I need to see it another time or two, to see if my opinion might have changed, as to which is his best.

I just noticed that May 31 now appears on the monthly schedule!

Well, if I had seen you in person, and noticed that you couldn't bend your pinky, I never would have said that!

> {quote:title=drednm wrote:}{quote} > Name one that's more irrelevant... Irrelevant to what? Relevant to what? Okay, themes that appeal FAR less to me: Elvis films Ester Williams films Andy Hardy films But, I am sure there are many fans of ALL of those. The point is that TCM shows many, many things, all of which have their fans, but probably most all have people who don't like them either. So, hey, watch what you like, don't watch what you don't like.

I can think of worse ways to waste a month.

> {quote:title=Bill711 wrote:}{quote} > With regard to Blade Runner, I think it is over rated. I have watched it twice because of all the praise for the film to see if I was missing something; I wasn't. The film has a lot of atmosphere but the story does not amount to much. To me, *Blade Runner* is one of the deepest and most philosophical SciFi films ever made. It is all about what it really means to be human. I rank it and *12 Monkeys* as the two best modern SciFi films. And, I'm not really a Bruce Willis fan. But, of course I respect your right to disagree.

> {quote:title=FredCDobbs wrote:}{quote} > A guy talks to a girl then drives around L.A. He stops and talks to another girl and drives around L.A. some more. He stops and talks to another girl and then he drives around L.A. then he stops somewhere and talks to a girl. Then he gets in his car and drives around L.A. and talks to another girl. Then he drives around L.A. some more and talks to another girl. Then he takes a ride in his car, he drives around L.A. a while, and he talks to a girl. > Sounds like fun, to me.

I hope they're having some Tex Ritter films!

You list *Star Ship Troopers* - cute young Nazis squash giant bugs, yet you omit *Blade Runner?* Blasphemy, I say, blasphemy!

I'd like to see them. I hope TCM programs them.

> {quote:title=DAKOTAWOMEN wrote:}{quote} > Is there a film that had so much influence on you that it changed the way you eat, dress, think, or live? I was thinking not-so-much, then I thought a little more. I think that probably almost everyone who watches movies has been affected in these ways. I saw Davy Crockett, as a child, and talked my grandmother into buying me a Davy Crockett outfit, and coonskin hat. I'm sure most women, and even a lot of men, have been influenced by fashion in film, whether they know it or not. Even though I am male, I am a cook. I have been influenced in my cooking, by some films. *Tampopo*, *Babette's Feast*, *Like Water for Chocolate*, and *Chocolat*, to name a few. As to how I think - well, I'm sure that a lot of films helped me form a social conscience, when I was young. Films like *I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang*, *Tom Joad*, *Wild Boys of the Road*, *The Great McGinty*, and doubtless, lots of others. I guess I was 20 when I saw *Z*. It made quite an impression on me, as did *O, Lucky Man* and *If*. But, as one gets older, I think one tends to see films that reinforce their values and opinions, and is less apt to change radically. Still, I've seen lots of great documentary films, and many of those have sharpened my thoughts and opinions.

> {quote:title=Scottman wrote:}{quote} > Maybe it's really ee cummings ! No way... ee cummings arranged things, spaced them out, gave them structure, to enhance their meaning. That post is so dense and impenetrable, as to be virtually unintelligible.