ValentineXavier
-
Posts
6,917 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by ValentineXavier
-
-
> {quote:title=fredbaetz wrote:}{quote}
>
> In war films, especially WW2, there's always someone from Brooklyn.
>
Or, the Bronx, or possibly Hoboken, for variety. William Bendix did a few of those.
-
I'm hoping TCM replays it. I decided to record it at the last minute, and didn't pad the runtime. I didn't notice that the Comcast guide had an 87m film in an 87m slot, so the end was dropped, and I deleted it. I hate get to the end of a film, and have it run out before the end!
-
>I never forget a face, but in your case, I'll make an exception.
Ann Sheridan in *Juke Girl*
-
What, no *Les Vampires* (1915) on any of those lists? Watta shame!
-
> {quote:title=redriver wrote:}{quote}
> Hitchhiking has a time honored place in film noir. Anything can happen. Just watch out for the DETOUR.
There is a song titled Detour. I know my dad sang it in the mid 50s. I sort of remember a bit of the lyrics -
As you go through life you'll find
You better heed that detour sign,
There's a muddy road ahead, detour...
It was written in 1945, same year as the film. I wonder if one inspired the other, and if so, which?
-
Possibly *The Green Slime*, but it's been years since I saw it. I refuse to watch the 4x3 version shown on TCM, and elsewhere.
-
They also lived young, and died fast...
-
I'm very much a Lang fan, love his Mabuse films, and his noirs. I've never seen *Spies*, but I'm glad to see it is on TCM's Nov. Schedule, along with some other Lang greats.
-
-
> {quote:title=MyFavoriteFilms wrote:}{quote}
> They weren't posted for you to agree with them, they were posted to stimulate discussion and see if others could think of films that better meet the criteria. Since you haven't offered any, then it must be assumed you can't think of any...? LOL
Well, I'm just catching up after three days away from the board, and didn't want to take the time to come up with a thoughtful alternative list. So, for now, I'll just comment on the 50s. There are probably many others I would place over *Marty*, but just off the top of my head, I'd say that John Cassavettes' *Shadows*, and Nick Ray's *Rebel Without a Cause* far surpass it for showing the times, and for innovation, and inspiration to other filmmakers.
-
> {quote:title=MyFavoriteFilms wrote:}{quote}
> I don't think I'm wrong at all. I have seen many films by those filmmakers you mention. I went to film school and those films were often screened. That's why I can form the opinions I have today because I did not think those films were very effective.
Ah, well, I guess probably watching them filled you with revulsion and disgust, since obviously it didn't cause you to change your opinion, or drive you insane.
You are of course entitled to your opinion, as are we all. But, your opinion stands counter to that of lots of film scholars, and film fans. So, please realize that one's opinions are just that, and not facts.
-
> {quote:title=MyFavoriteFilms wrote:}{quote}
> Normally I would not reply directly, because I don't wish to engage in negativity.
Perhaps you don't realize it, but you are probably the most negative person on this board, IMO, and I think some others would agree.
-
What makes *The General* a great film is not its humor, but Keaton's single-minded determination, and its spot-on style.
I am almost certain that *Seven Chances* was shown on TCM a number of years ago, could have been 2001. I think it was part of 24 hours of Keaton silents? I believe I recorded about half of them.
Edited by: ValentineXavier on Oct 16, 2010 11:03 PM
-
I couldn't agree with even one of them.
-
> {quote:title=MyFavoriteFilms wrote:}{quote}
> I could not disagree more. I mean, like really, I could not disagree more.
>
> Just because film is a visual medium does not mean it is exempt from telling a coherent story.
>
> You use visuals to show glimpses into the character's story. Style serves story. Style should not serve itself.
I suggest you never watch any films by Stan Brakage, Kenneth Anger, Jack Smith, Maya Deren, Peter Greenaway, David Lynch... and many others.
Possible results, if you do:
Realizing how very wrong you are
Being filled with revulsion and or disgust
Insanity.
-
Well, there is a 'hallelujah moment' I am looking for. I'm very much a fan of Kurosawa's films. I've seen most of them, and like all I have seen, save one. That one is *Hidden Fortress*. Lucas credits this film with inspiring Star Wars, and is a popular film. I have seen it several times, but just haven't been able to appreciate it. It has a strong female lead, but she is just such a wooden character, I just don't find her in the least bit engaging. Even Toshiro Mifune's character seems rather generic, and the film as a whole a hodgepodge. Well, next Friday, I will see it again, on a theater screen, 35mm print, recently made. I will try once again to appreciate this film!
I did have a minor hallelujah moment watching the Julie Christie films on TCM a couple of months ago. I've long thought her a very wooden, unconvincing actress, and generally avoided films she was in. Well, after watching her in several films, I now find that while I don't think she is a great actress, she certainly is an adequate one, in most of her films I've seen. So, I will no longer avoid her.
-
> {quote:title=Kinokima wrote:}{quote}
> Well on an individual level yes we can say why we think a film is good or bad. But it's not an opinion but a fact that *Big Sleep* works (and still works) for a lot of people. Besides a muddled storyline the film is still considered one of the best of its genre. I don't think people are being forgiving at all, I think they just really like the movie.
>
Rather than muddled, I'd call it complex, confusing, and not completely resolved. That is an essential part of what sets *The Big Sleep* apart, and above, other films of its genre and era. Life is like that, complex, confusing, and not completely resolved. To "fix it," as MFM suggests, would be to destroy what makes it unique.
-
> {quote:title=FredCDobbs wrote:}{quote}
>
> Several people here, over the years, have said that TCM uses a hard-drive digital format, but I want to know how they receive each film. Surely a distributor doesnt send a complete hard drive to TCM. The film must arrive at TCM in some kind of format, either electronic or in a physical package.
>
> Nobody here seems to be able to answer that question.
I thought I read somewhere on these forums that TCM was supplied with hard drives for their films. I don't personally know that to be a fact. Of course there could be more than one film on a HDD, so films from a single source might be combined on suppliers' HDDs, then transferred to TCM's HDDs.
I work on a week-long film festival that gets well over a hundred films, and many of those come from the filmmakers on HDDs. HDDs are smaller than cans of 35mm film. So, for TCM to receive films on HDDs wouldn't be so strange.
-
I can just see Woody cozying up to Veronica Lake...
*Gross Encounters of the **** Kind*
This is a biopic. An alien space craft empties its holding tanks on Steve Speilberg's house, thus inspiring his movie career.
-
This thread has become uninteresting...
-
> {quote:title=HarryLong wrote:}{quote}
> & save $25 a pop.
That's pretty expensive pop! I can get a decent bottle of wine for less than that.
-
> {quote:title=HarryLong wrote:}{quote}
> I might be wrong, but I was under the impression that all DVD recorders had the copyguard detection software in place. Itw as part of the agreement whereby the movie studios allowed the machines to be made available at the home use level.
This is true, all machines should be sensitive to 'copyguard.' There may be just a few that aren't. But, the real problem is that some detect it where it doesn't exist. Sonys and some Toshibas are notorious for this.
> If you know someone capable of such re-monkeying, the software can be disabled. There are also several little boxes (I call them Veeblefetzers) available that defeat the copyguard in most cases.
I see you are a Mad magazine fan... my "Veeblefetzer" converts a component signal to S-Video, so I can make anamorphic recordings. It does defeat copy protection, but I don't need it. On my local Comcast, nothing is copy protected, not even PPV, or OnDemand.
-
> {quote:title=HarryLong wrote:}{quote}
>... MacMurray fought Wilder on doing the part in DOUBLE INDEMNITY because he didn't want to or didn't think he could play a villain.
I know he does villainous things, but I don't really see him as a villain. He's a good guy gone bad. He knows what he is doing is wrong, his heart isn't in it, and it leads to his downfall.
-
Your point is well taken. But it is odd that I, a lefty, am, in my way, sticking up for the Duke, while MFF, who I perceive to be on the other side of the political spectrum, is running him down.
JANUARY SCHEDULE IS UP!!!!
in General Discussions
Posted
> {quote:title=hlywdkjk wrote:}{quote}
> Reactions to the January 2011 schedule -
>
> *"I am blown away by this schedule."* - LoveFilmNoir
> *"Wow! I can hardly wait for January!"* - Scottman
> *"TCM is completely outta control!!! Where do I start, wow!"* - markbeckhuaf
> *"Yikes!"* - FredCDobbs
> *"oh my GOODNESS...THANK YOU TCM!"* - MissGoddess
> *"This is an extraordinary schedule, perhaps even better than November."* - JonasEB
> *"January is consistently among the two or three best months all year on TCM. This is no exception."* - SweetSmellOfSuccess
> *"I am absolutely delighted with January's schedule."* - countessdelave
> *"This is one of the best months in memory."* - filmlover
>
> Can we safely say that "all is forgiven" for TCM's "Jacques Cousteau Month"?
>
> Kyle In Hollywood
You've found the schedule's only flaw - it needs a little Jacques for balance!
Seriously, there are lots of things I'm looking forward to on it, the Ozu films for one thing.
I see that Richard Lester/John Lennon's *How I Won the War* is listed as letterboxed. The OAR of this film is 1.66:1, and I have NEVER seen it properly letterboxed, anywhere. The last time I saw it, on another channel, they matted a 4x3 version on the top and bottom, making it 1.66:1, but losing image on all four sides! I know, because I compared it to my 4x3 copy. I do SO hope TCM gets it right!
A tip to others who plan to DVR lots of the shorts, in case it has not occurred to you. Do *NOT* program them individually. Record them in blocks. Use your DVR's settings to extend recordings, 30m, 1 hour, 1.5 hours, 2 hours, as needed. That way, you won't find heads or tails clipped, or on the next recording, the titles won't fill your DVR, and if you transfer them to a DVDR, or computer HDD, it's way easier to do one long title.