AndyM108

Except for Lion in Winter and African Queen, Kathryn Hepburn leaves me very cold. That's funny, because after she got those godawful pre-Stage Door films out of her system, those are the only two movies of Hepburn that I can't stand.** Formula plots on steroids and costume dramas just never do much for me, but obviously in the case of The African Queen I'm in a distinct minority. **Though in truth I'm talking only about her films from the late 30's through the mid-50's. Haven't seen too many of the ones she made after that.

A few of the forgotten 30s movies the station has been playing this year are surprisingly good and deserving of being rediscovered. The overwhelming majority, however, are such poorly produced cliché loaded pieces of schlock that I can only conclude that the only reason for which they were made was that their stars--even legends like Mary Astor and Lionel Barrymore--were heavy gamblers who had to film those clunkers in order to be able to pay off their debts. While I enjoyed most of the Barrymores that played yesterday, I don't disagree with the point that most movies follow fairly standard plot lines and are worth one viewing at most. Where I disagree is that the 30's were somehow unique in that regard. The other thing is that while Astor and Lionel Barrymore were both fine actors, neither of them had the force of personality that enabled them to carry many a cliched plot all by themselves. It took a Cagney or a Stanwyck to do that, and even actors with their level of dynamism could only take a potboiler so far. My take has always been that the only way to learn to distinguish among the best films, the merely enjoyable, and the downright insufferable is by trial and error. After a while you can look at the plot synopsis and the names of the actors and pretty much figure out which of those three categories a movie is likely to fall into, and spare yourself a lot of future time wasting.

Somebody already mentioned Forrest Gump but I'll list it again. I thought I'd like it--the idea of him haphazrdly showing up at historical events appealed to me, but no. Just no. It's not because I dislike Tom Hanks in particular (like so many folks here). I think it's the ridiculous accent he affects that sets my teeth on edge. I can't even imagine a sentient adult who'd read a plot summary of Forrest Gump ever wanting to plunk down 10 or 11 bucks to see it. Has there ever been a movie that was so popular and at the same time so mercilessly (and rather maliciously) lampooned? It's the sort of movie that would seem to have the power to lower a viewer's IQ by a good 5 or 10 points between the opening and closing credits.

Absolutely priceless, and I'm glad that Part 2 was also there. "Vera" really had Bette Davis's speech patterns down pat.

At the risk of being laughed at forever, I'd nominate The Umbrellas of Cherbourg as the most "beautiful" movie I've ever seen. Of course the scenery is unremarkable, but with the singing, the poignancy of the plot, and the ethereal loveliness of Catherine Deneuve, the entire film just kind of floats on a dream. It's kind of ironic, since musicals are just about my least favorite genre, but this one is a major exception.

Jose Cabiya, the husband of the younger sister of my mother, loved SHANE so much that he gave to the second of his five sons, Jose Luis Cabiya, the nickname Shane. I also knew a Shane who was named after the movie character. Unfortunately this one wound up as a d r u g g i e who's now serving time for a hit-and-run case that happened while he was s t o n e d out of his mind. Maybe his mom should have gone with Cody or Bruno instead.

Andy, Iagree with what you said about Myrna Loy. I always try to imagine Myrna in this role, but I just can't! Haha Both Myrna and Roz were first rate dramatic actresses, as you can see in The Best Years of Our Lives and the vastly underrated classic Roughly Speaking, which I am SO glad TCM makes a point of showing at least once a year.* And both were among the better comediennes of all time. But within those comic roles, there's a divergence. Loy's comedic touch was defined by the razor-sharp, sophisticated Nora Charles character, who so perfectly complemented William Powell's equally debonair Nick. Whereas while Russell's best comic characters often could also give as well as take (His Girl Friday and The Women), there was usually at least an underlying zaniness or even lighter than air quality about them (as in Rendezvous) that would've seemed totally incongruous for Myrna. I can't exactly imagine a disheveled Loy sprawled in a clothes hamper while Joan Crawford mocks her with "Do come again, Mrs. Prowler," whereas that was one of Roz's finest comic moments. *Some men fantasize about Marilyn Monroe. If I were single, I'd be looking for a woman just like Rosalind Russell's Louise Randall.

Personally, I prefer that than to the longer version. **** Erich von Stroheim for not making a 140-minute movie in the first place and forcing MGM to edit the movie. I totally hear you. 4 hours?? I don't think so. Had no idea the 140 version had seen the light of day on TCM. Having seen the 241 minute version twice through, my only thought was that I wish that they'd preserved the original 462 minute version. I can't imagine that you could cut it down to 140 minutes and preserve the full impact of the greater work. Some movies (Lawrence of Arabia; Intolerance) drag on forever, but Greed is not one of them.

Right, Andy (or is that Arnold?) Actually most of my acquaintances call me "Taxi", but that's another story. I'm all for book shops. Sadly, they're becoming an endangered species. I agree, most self-promotion threads I regard as spam, but anything that promotes books and book shops is fine with me. Since I had a shop for 23 years myself, I couldn't agree more, and here's one in Baltimore, of all places, that now deals in movie memorabilia on a scale that's probably second only to Edmunds. Their emphasis of film material is understated by their home page, but when you browse their online catalogs you'll start to get the picture, and even there it's the tip of the iceberg. http://www.royalbooks.com/

I recorded Rendezvous way back in 2010 and just watched it for the first time after reading this thread. And I'm glad I did. The plot was good enough for what seemed kind of like a programmer, and though this wasn't Roz's best role by a long shot, just seeing her in any movie is always a treat. And I loved that elaborate yet primitive "intelligence room", with their alphabetical decoder circles that looked like giant inserts from the 1969 Baseball Encyclopedia. This was about the highest level of technical wizardry my feeble brain could ever comprehend, and I'm glad they kept to the basics. As for the plot: Maybe if our Army intelligence hadn't wasted so much time going after "Bolsheviks" during WW 1, they might have caught on to a few of those German agents operating right under their noses. P. S. This wouldn't have been that good a role for Myrna Loy, not after seeing her in the debonair Nora Charles role just one year earlier. The Roz of 1935 was much better suited for a part like this.

So does your vote go to Skimpole, since you can't split? Fair point. On the strength of La Haine, then, I'd give Skimpole a split 15-round decision in triple overtime and about 18 innings worth of upstate returns. That film is just so powerful that it has to be shown on TCM. SansFin's and Lydecker's entries were so damn strong I hate to vote "against" them, but as the Brooklyn Eagle used to say after each Dodgers' World Series loss: WAIT TILL NEXT YEAR

Usually I tag promotions as spam, but this one gets a pass. I've heard about that book shop many times, and only wish I didn't live 3000 miles away.

If it's not too late, I'd split my vote between Skimpole and SansFin. If it were to come down to it, the tiebreaker might go to Skimpole for including La Haine. Lydecker would be up there but for one minor glitch: Including the abridged 140 minute version of Greed as a premiere, when TCM has already shown the much better four hour version at least twice in the past few years. But all three of those entries easily stand out over the rest of them.

Cripes! it DID! It gave m e r d e the "star" treatment! Sepiatone You should have tried "mergleferde." The nanny doesn't understand doubletalk.

I haven't seen too many movies on your list, but I loved Heathers, and I've yet to meet a single person who doesn't like (or love) Reefer Madness. Along with Pink Flamingos and The Rocky Horror Picture Show, that was one of wildly popular perennials of the "midnight movies" phenomenon of the 70's, and probably attracted far more actual viewers than most of the mainstream first run releases of that era.

Two drop-dead gorgeous actresses who kept their looks well into middle age and beyond...

Here we go savilng tens of BILLIONS of dollars a year buying prescription drugs from Canadian pharmacies, and we won't even let them watch STAGECOACH??? What's going on here??? I know if I were Canadian, I'd be grumbling almost as much as the guy whose boss wouldn't spring for genuine Scot paper towels!

In reverse order in which they were shown, I'd go with Spione, Laura, and for something completely different, The Sin of Madelon Claudet. I'd throw in Baby Face if it hadn't been aired about half a dozen times a year, whereas the other three don't show up nearly as often. And if I had to choose one, Fritz Lang's Spione (Spies) would win out. Fans of his two early Dr. Mabuse films would love it. The Weimar era films of Germany may well be the best set of movies ever made, and this is one of the best of that group. As for the worst, I'll leave that blank. After just seeing John Wayne in a movie (The Big Trail) that I actually liked, I feel in too good a mood to go negative unless someone mentions The Graduate.

Whenever I find myself feeling a mellow vibe I like to listen to the flower people and their far out, life affirming music. I've always thought of Simon and Garfunkel as the idols of sensitive, liberal leaning, poetic undergrads and precocious high schoolers back in the day, nttawwt of course. Yes, somewhat of a stereotype, but there's still some truth there. Feelin' groovy man. Whatever works, but when I want to find life affirmation in popular music, I'll go with The Spinners' "Sadie". Or Sam Cooke's "A Change Is Gonna Come" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOYuhLNwh3A

Where have you been, Andy my old friend I think your take on Paul's intent is off, Off, off, off Because I always thought it was about A yearning for those grand old days of yore Yore, yore, yore And not a slight....on Joltin' Joe. You had me up to the "Woo Hoo Hoo."

I don't know how to say this politely, but Garfunkel always struck me as effeminate, at least in songs like Rosemary, Sage, The Sound of Silence, etc. Just too precious for my taste. And you can't mock Joe Dimaggio and later try to pretend you didn't! (Grrrrrr) The one group you named I have some recollection of is the Jefferson Airplane, but it's not because of their music, it's because I used to be acquainted with Jack Casady when we were both at Alice Deal Jr. High School in Washington. He and I used to accompany a mutual friend on his Evening Star paper route. Jack used to spend every evening going from one side of the DC area to the other, soaking up every kind of music he could: R&R, R&B, country, blues, bluegrass, the whole nine yards. I never cared much for the psychedelic sound, but I had to respect his background and his dedication. Another guy from that band, the guitarist whose name escapes me (Korkunen or something like that), went to my high school, but he was a few years older and I never met him.

I'm not a fan of Wayne's movies in general, but I loved The Big Trail. But what AMAZED me was finding out that Red Flack---who looked like a combination of Haystacks Calhoun and The Gold Rush's Big Jim McKay on steroids---was played by Tyrone Power's dad! You could've knocked me over with one of Charlie Chaplin's shoelaces.

The appeal of THE GRADUATE, upon release, on the nation's campuses, was almost universal. It was certainly not restricted to the "eternal flower children". A most painfully true rebuttal, which I had the misfortune to witness first hand. But a lot of those people eventually got over their rapture, so their 106 minute sojurn into Simon and Garfunkel's flowerland proved to be blessedly transient.

Actually my listening experience in that era was pretty much limited to the likes of Lorraine Ellison, Carla Thomas, The Manhattans, the Royalettes, and whoever and whatever else was being played on "Double-U-O-L, 1450 in DC". I don't think those singers you mentioned ever showed up too much there, though I loved Joni Mitchell when she later started working with Charlie Mingus. The entire British invasion and other forms of "white" pop music from that period pretty much passed right over my head, and by the time it was over I'd moved on to jazz, Big Band, and bluegrass. You might say I'm generationally confused.

Can you watch movies set in the present where the actors are wearing costumes from the past? Well, maybe if the garment workers were being paid union wages.