Sprocket_Man

The PG-13 version is still being assembled by the Weinstein Company. And it's quite unfortunate that the integrity of this drama -- and of you as a teacher -- is being dictated and undermined by the socially backward mores of the region in which you live, and craven politicians who exploit it to further their personal ambitions.

A: Please don't type your entire posting in capital letters. B: The word is spelled rations, not "rashions." C: Yes, it's ABANDON SHIP, and it starred Tyrone Power, Mai Zetterling and Stephen Boyd.

The ultimate wood-eating hero is Arnold Schwarzenegger as The Termite-nator.

> {quote:title=Fedya wrote:}{quote} > Trust me. You don't want to see *Dondi*. > > It's so bad it's not even "so bad it's good". It may be the one film that would have justified the million Chinese sent to assist the North Koreans against the U.S. during the Korean War.

Yes, I've seen it (in fact, my cousin produced it).

Mikl?s R?zsa's score to IVANHOE. Not the master's greatest masterpiece, but still great and my favorite, by turns heroic, romantic, exhilarating and heartbreaking. No one could tell a story in music -- complementing and expanding on the images and dialogue, and not merely reinforcing it -- like R?zsa.

I saw it a couple of weeks ago and found it as faithful as I did bland. Michael Fassbender, the film's Rochester, comes across as Daniel Day-Lewis lite (he even looks a bit like Day-Lewis), surely the weakest link in an unimaginative effort. Frankly, if you're not going to take a story like this and give it the all-stops-pulled panache given the 1944 Stevenson version, I don't see the point in bothering to make it.

> {quote:title=EdwardJr wrote:}{quote} > Why was Anthony Quayle not in this movie? He was the ultimate Brit military, in many of his roles. And maybe Lean just didn't think him right for the part (or any part) in the film. Frankly, the only role in the film Quayle was suited for is that of Major Warden, but it couldn't have been cast better than with the great Jack Hawkins (also a much bigger box office name than Quayle's). Lean and producer Sam Spiegel surely knew that.

> {quote:title=slaytonf wrote:}{quote} > Three hundred sixty degree shots generally don't work. They come off as stagy, egotistical grandstanding by a director (cf. the three-sixty shot in Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House). They are clumsy and awkward to execute, interfering with the pace of a film, especially in a chase sequence (cf. High Sierra, Paper Moon). But they can be made to work, primarily by making them unapparent, or answer so well the requirements of the movie that they come off as appropriate, even if they are a showcase. Three 360˚ shots that work well include the party scene in Quadrophenia, where the hand-held camera follows Phil Daniels; the cemetery scene in The Thomas Crown Affair, when Jack Warden drops off the robbery cash and Steve McQueen arrives to retrieve it; and the shot of Gene Kelly, Frank Sinatra, and Jules Munshin dancing atop the skyscraper in On The Town. Another great shot, which admittedly is not a full three-sixty, more like a one-eighty, is the morning pre-cattle drive shot in Red River, where the camera takes on the persona of a participant surveying the scene, panning from Montgomery Clift, across the cowboys and herd, everything still, the tension mounting, all eyes on John Wayne, waiting for him to give the signal to start. I couldn't agree more; the "orbiting" camera is one of the more irritating conventions in film. About the only instance in which I think it lends itself to the story and mood of a film is the scene between James Stewart and Kim Novak in the barn in VERTIGO (after all, the movie's called "Vertigo" for a reason). Of course, Bernard Herrmann's delirious music to underscore it helps carry the whole grand, dizzy schmeer.

> {quote:title=tnutty wrote:}{quote} > Can someone tell us what happened. It ended where he was in the big room with desks, waiting to have his transformation reversed. > Please help, thanks. Rock gets turned into Soylent Green. Remember, you heard it here first.

> {quote:title=thomasterryjr wrote:}{quote} > I have to admit I never heard of Peggy Cummings but she has a "sneaky" gorgeous look to her especially when her hair is disheveled. So sneaky that you failed to notice that her name was Cummins, not Cummings.

> {quote:title=drednm wrote:}{quote} > O'Toole won an honorary Oscar a few years ago. One doesn't win an honorary Oscar (or anything else). The whole point is that it's not in any sense competitive. O'Toole was simply given the Oscar by the Academy for his body of work.

> {quote:title=JefCostello wrote:}{quote} > I included Loretta Young, who was absolutely one of the best beauties of her era. I think she was very underrated as well. Underrated? How? What she was was the most humorless actress of Hollywood's Golden Age.

Jack Cardiff (whom I had the pleasure of meeting), the greatest of them all.

WHY do you keep posting the same thread over and over? Stop it.

WHY do you keep posting the same thread over and over? Stop it.

WHY do you keep posting the same thread over and over? Stop it.

A: You mean THE BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES. B: Why do you keep posting the same thread over and over?

> {quote:title=KatyHess wrote:}{quote} > I'm so frustrated that I can't remember the name of this film! And I need to know to write a paper. I know for certain the film isnt The Best Days of Our lives, although it was mentioned in the lecture. If you can help me out please do so soon! > > Thanks. You mean THE BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES.

> {quote:title=MovieProfessor wrote:}{quote} >...only ?Helen of Troy? was presented with an impressive overture by composer Max Steiner. Both the Warner epics ended up as a moderate success at the box-office. While I take exception to much of what you wrote in your posting, I had to the correct the above misstatement. HELEN OF TROY never had an overture. What was billed as an "overture" on the home video versions was actually a piece of music cobbled together from the film's music tracks by the (nameless) person who edited the unauthorized bootleg CD of the soundtrack that was issued in the late 1990's. In the absence of paperwork from the score's original recording sessions, the studio was actually bamboozled into believing that there was an overture, and so included it in authorized releases, but it's actually 100% fake. Of course, even in the grand old days of Big Studio roadshow attractions, not all overtures, entr'actes and exit music were original compositions. In many cases, they were cut together from the films' underscoring exactly the way the anonymous bootlegger did it for the CD. It depended on the films' budgets and post-production schedules. There's also your assertion that Warner's was as committed to stereophonic sound as Fox was. This is patently false. Fox, which was actually the last studio to switch to recording on magnetic tape, jumped in with both feet, and utilized stereo for both music and dialogue. While Warner's began to record their scores in stereo, their stereo release program was actually quite limited, and they never bothered to record multi-track dialogue. They also re-used their full-coat 35mm stereo masters, leaving, in most cases, only 1/4" mono back-up tapes, whereas Fox preserved much of its stereo heritage. As for E.W. Korngold, whom you mentioned elsewhere in this thread, his devotion to his art forbade him from ever allowing his music to be edited together by others into a false "overture." He only wrote two for films: JUAREZ, which was recorded and attached to the full release prints for the film's original engagements, and THE PRIVATE LIVES OF ELIZABETH AND ESSEX, which was performed only once, live, for the invited audience at the film's world premiere. Both pieces are, happily, available on CD in modern re-recordings.

> {quote:title=hlywdkjk wrote:}{quote} > *"But I was very curious about the stories-up views of the lobby, how it was done in l932, and was just amazed by that. Does anyone know how this was done?"* - jbh If you're referring to the view shooting directly down at the hotel's reception desk, it was achieved by mounting camera at the top of the soundstage to get the live-action footage, then combining it in post-production with a matte painting of the tiered floors of the hotel's atrium.

> {quote:title=finance wrote:}{quote} > This may have been Lancaster's only comedy. Not really a comedy, but has comic elements. Yeah...except for THE CRIMSON PIRATE, THE FLAME AND THE ARROW, THE SCALPHUNTERS, THE PROFESSIONALS, THE DEVIL'S DISCIPLE, THE KENTUCKIAN, VERA CRUZ and HIS MAJESTY O'KEEFE.

Though it's pretty certain that Herman Mankiewicz did the bulk of the writing, it's an injustice to both posterity and his collaborators to assert that Welles and associate producer John Houseman didn't have a major hand in the shaping of the story. Beyond this, it's also dishonest to ignore the all-too-obvious fact that KANE's story and structure owe a tremendous debt to Preston Sturges's screenplay to 1933's THE POWER AND THE GLORY.

> {quote:title=MovieMadness wrote:}{quote} > Borgnine is coming up in one of my favorite films on March 1st on FMC The Emperor of the North The Lee Marvin part (in what was originally titled "Emperor of the North Pole") was first offered to Charlton Heston, who turned it down. > {quote:title=JonnyGeetar wrote:}{quote} > In retrospect, the only Best Actor nominee who really derserved to even be there was Kirk Douglas, John Wayne (who was actually offered Crawford's role in King's Men and turned it down) should have got the nomination for She Wore a Yellow Ribbon and Cagney should have been there for White Heat. Wayne's part in THE SANDS OF IWO JIMA, for which he was nominated for the '49 Best Actor Oscar, had originally been offered to...Kirk Douglas, who went against his own agent's advice and chose to do CHAMPION, instead. > {quote:title=hamradio wrote:}{quote} > > Do you think the "10 Commandments" was actually shot in Egypt? The exteriors for the 1956 THE TEN COMMANDMENTS were shot in Egypt.

> {quote:title=MovieMadness wrote:}{quote} > At the end of Cleopatra they have a scene where the army has left but no explanation, all of the scenes for that were cut out like a lot of the other parts. Too bad they didn't save the original cut as it is hard to say how good the movie was when all you have is a portion like it exists now. Of course there's an explanation (not that it'd be hard to figure out without one): right after the intermission, there's a scene between between Antony and his general, Rufio, in which the latter's berating Antony for neglecting his duties ("Your army hasn't been paid in months!"; "It's also difficult to tell the rank of a naked general -- and generals without armies are naked, indeed!" My favorite line in the movie). Between that and Antony's deserting his soldiers and sailors during the Battle of Actium, his boat sailing right over the bobbing heads of drowning men imploring him help and leadership, to pursue Cleopatra (who thinks him dead) back to Alexandria, it's hardly any wonder that his army deserts him on the eve of his final showdown with Octavian. The only question that remains (one that's essential to the story's timeless allure) is whether Antony gave up half the world for Love or Ambition or a belief that he could satisfy both mistresses. In this, he proved himself ultimately incapable of even comprehending Caesar's instinctive knowledge that he could never be any greater than his troops' devotion toward him. To Antony, his men were a mere, and disposable, commodity, and he paid for that blindness by losing everything. That's why the tale is a tragedy, as Shakespeare knew all too well.