AndyM108

It seems there are more movies from the late 1960's, 70's, 80's, 90's and even the 2000's on the TCM schedule. I would rather TCM focus on the classic movies from the 1920's, 30's, 40's and 50's. This is a topic that's been hashed and re-hashed at least 10 times a year for what seems like forever. Bottom line: It's simply *not true* that TCM is now showing fewer and fewer "classic" movies than in previous years. "Seems like" is no substitute for actual information. Others have time and again provided decade breakdowns of TCM's programming over the years, and there's no basis whatever for your complaint. TCM's primary focus has always been on those decades that you (and I) prefer, but it's never been the exclusive focus, nor will it ever be.

No one's saying that. I'm saying using a plethora of bad language narrows the audience your film will appeal to, so why use so much? Don't you want EVERYone to see your movie? Not necessarily. You want everyone possible to see *your* movie, but if you try to please everybody, it's not going to be *your* movie for long. ANGELS WITH DIRTY FACES can be enjoyed by my parents as well as my kids. Still pretty brutal and appalling without any blood or cussing. How'd they do that? By following the Breen code. No kowtowing to Breen, no movie. It wasn't all that complicated. Certainly you're not suggesting that the G-rated language in Angels With Dirty Faces bore any real resemblance to the New York City streets of 1939. I lived on those Manhattan streets as a small boy in the late 40's and learned all those nasty words well before my 6th birthday. Why can't anyone these days do that? For the simple reason that a 21st century movie about street urchins who spoke with G-rated vocabulary would be about as credible as a movie about baseball that featured a woman pitching in the World Series. Does anyone in a public or professional situation talk like that? No, only low level people in society talk like that. So if your movie is about criminals, dialogue with lots of swearing might be appropriate. So only criminals and "low lifes" swear? Are you serious? And I DO think casual swearing by regular people in movies "normalizes" it for impressionable teens. Ever listen in a high school hallway? (I always wonder what kind of job they think they're going to get) If they have a sentient IQ, they'll tame their language in appropriate situations. And if they don't, the chances are strong that they didn't learn that language from a movie, but rather from their peers.

The cartoon parody don't show anything, its mostly suggestive. I thought Grumpy hated women. What, do you think that gang bangers *love* women? What exactly is a *Memorial* ****?? It's a memorial to the entire sanctified Disney brand, expressed in lampoon format. (I should have used "lampoon" rather than "parody" the first time around. Sorry.)

There are plenty of children in some of the more notable foreign movies, too, but they're often in far more substantive roles than they are over here. Bicycle Thieves; Shoeshine; The Battle of Algiers; Open City; Germany: Year Zero; Pixote; The 400 Blows; etc., just to name a few. Very few Hollywood movies ever attempt to deal with the life of children on this level.

*WARNING:* The Disney suits didn't go for this sublime little parody of their three fingered, missing body parts family, as seen in a 1967 issue of Paul Krassner's magazine, The Realist. I could just copy the picture, but I don't want to offend anyone, so *DON'T* click on the link if you're one of those easily offended types: http://www.ep.tc/realist/74/12.jpg

Andy, if you can ever bring yourself to watch an MGM musical, Words and Music, you might be pleased with what happens to Gene Kelly and Vera Ellen when they dance to "Slaughter on Tenth Avenue." Is that the one where they used Bing Crosby and Mickey Rooney as human shields, only to have their bluff called? If that's the one, I'm sure I enjoyed it.

Too wholesome. Well, originally I'd thought about using Mark Twain's famous dictum, *"First, let's kill all the choreographers",* but that would've been going a bit too far, and I wouldn't want to lose the soft shoe vote.

I don't like to see smoking in old films, but they didn't know any better. In today's films, we do, and don't need to show it, which glamorizes it, even when the bad guys do it. As far as I'm concerned, we should line up every last tobacco executive against a garage wall and give them an old fashioned St. Valentine's Day greeting, circa 1929. They are truly the scum of the Earth. That said, smoking is like swearing. To the extent that it's credible within the context of the movie's time and place, and among the demographic being portrayed, I don't have any problem with it. But no "product placement", please. And don't let John Waters film the smoking scenes in Odorama.

That's my opinion too. I'll be very glad to see him as host, even more so, if that means more noirs - my favorite genre. If I were running for president on the TCM ticket, my campaign slogan would be *"LESS SINGING, MORE KILLING".*

The new movie playing in theatres, "Wolf of Wall Street" the f-word is uttered 506 times, breaking all records. I'd just like to know who goes around counting such things. Is this something a future Jeopardy contestant might be well off knowing?

Did you ever read the script for the Broadway play version of The Philadelphia Story ? It actually contains a number of saltier phrases, which were cleaned up in the movie, Goodness gracious sakes alive, we learn something every day.

All I care about is that the language used in a movie is true to the language that would have been used in similar real life situations. You wouldn't have expected to hear Cary Grant cursing in The Philadelphia Story, and you wouldn't expect to hear Joe Pesci in Goodfellas coming out with "gosh darn" or "aw, shucks". I just want the language to be believable.

*Too Late For Tears* would be a real TCM coup. Lizabeth Scott was great as an actress in direct proportion to the lowlife rating of her character, and it's hard to get much more lowlife than she is in this one.

1. What kind of film would Jennifer Jones & Gary Cooper have made? A melodrama, a western? Something, anything. Well, maybe anything but *Carrie.* After watching Laurence Olivier give one of the best performances of his career opposite Jones in the 1952 screen adaptation of the Drieser novel, the thought of Gary Cooper in the Hurstwood role makes me shudder.

Maybe it's just that my eyes are in better shape than my ears, but 99% of the problems I've had with the film quality on TCM has had to do with the sound, as opposed to the picture. The problem is worst in the movies in the early sound films, and it reaches its peak during movies that combine muffled voices with constantly playing background music. It only seems to affect about 2% of the films I watch, but at least for me it's many times bigger a problem than the picture quality. And ironically, I have the same problem with some relatively current movies, especially certain scenes in mob movies where the gangsters all seem to be trying to channel their inner Don Corleone and see who can speak in the softest whisper. But then there are some older movies that look as bright and clear as if we'd been transported backward in a time machine. Last night's Drums Along The Mohawk (1939) was one such film. I only watched it for a few minutes, but I can't recall ever seeing a better or clearer print from a Technicolor movie that old.

Hi Andy - this is the book that I have: http://www.amazon.com/Hurrells-Hollywood-Portraits-Chapman-Collection/dp/0810934345/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1390801318&sr=8-2&keywords=georgehurrellhollywoodportraits+ Wow, that's one I'd never even known about, and I can't believe I missed it when it came out. The one I have was published by Graystone Press in 1991, with Jean Harlow's portrait on the cover: http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=8375982969&searchurl=bi%3D0%26amp%3Bbx%3Don%26amp%3Bds%3D50%26amp%3Bpics%3Don%26amp%3Brecentlyadded%3Dall%26amp%3Bsortby%3D17%26amp%3Btn%3DThe%2BPortfolios%2Bof%2BGeorge%2BHurrell%26amp%3Bx%3D0%26amp%3By%3D0

All my books are in bookcases, but these are my five favorite "coffee table" sized movie books: Sin In Soft Focus: Pre-Code Hollywood The Portfolios of George Hurrell* The Art of Film Noir (Eddie Muller) The Dark Page The Dark Page II The last two are by the Baltimore rare book dealer Kevin Johnson (Royal Books), who specializes in film books, film manuscripts, publicity photos, press kits, and first printings of novels that were made into movies. The Dark Page and The Dark Page II both feature full page color photos of the dust jackets of the first printings of novels that were the basis of classic film noir titles. The first volume features the noirs of the 40's, and the second volume deals with the noirs from 1950 - 1965, though in both cases the novels themselves (and the jacket photos) sometimes pre-date the films by quite a bit. They make a nice complementary companion to Eddie Muller's lavish book on film noir posters. BTW Kevin's website is http://www.royalbooks.com/ , and anyone who loves classic film, both domestic and foreign, will find a lot to drool over on it. I was in the book business for 29+ years, and I've never seen a collection of movie related material on Royal Books' level anywhere, even in Hollywood itself. *This may be the "older" Hurrell book that Eugenia's talking about.

Funny but I was going to say something similar to "Bette Davis up to about The Petrified Forest", but I didn't wish to be picked on! Usually I go much more for the natural look in women, but from a sexiness POV Davis was at her best when they put concentrated peroxide into her daily shower. She was great in all of her earlier films, even the many potboilers, but she was especially compelling in So Big and The Petrified Forest. Those were far from her meatiest roles as an actress, but it's hard to remember any other movies where she conveyed such a radiant sense of youthful exuberance. I do find her very cute in those early years even when she has just washed her hair. Nice one.

Maybe it's due to my relatively young age (I'm only 26), but I think there are plenty of films from the 90s that have stood the test of time after 20 years. But I don't see today's cineplex-friendly, CGI and explosions fare ever being regarded as "classic". I don't think TCM is ever going to play Michael Bay because no one considers his movies to be classics. Anyway, I find that it's good to keep an open mind about things and not blindly dismiss something as not being "a classic" just because it's newer (or to dismiss anything made before the 90s as "boring" just because it doesn't have CGI in it). Just a few years ago I was three times your age, but I think your POV is the only sensible one. There are scores of movies from the 90's that definitely qualify as "classics" of one type or another, and some that should already be considered for top 10 all-time lists. And most movies from any era are pretty much trash - - - TCM just happens to screen out many of the worst ones from earlier decades, so much of us aren't even aware of their existence, But I also agree with your other point that the cheesy focus-group, special effects based movies are unlikely to stand the test of time, at least among people like yourself who will probably have seen far better movies of the 90's to form a real basis for comparison. But just as there are plenty of people from my generation who still consider Elvis movies and Beach Blanket Bingo to outrank The Godfather, there will probably also be people now in their 20's who will always treasure today's trash and never even watch the much better movies that are also out there.

Does the film impart some helpful philosophy about the human condition? That's probably *the* foremost factor I have in mind, even if it's only subconsciously, in elevating a film from "genre classic" to "top 50 movie of all time", though it's not an ironclad condition. But that's why as much as I love the noir genre, I couldn't rank even something as great as The Killers or Out of the Past on the same level as Kapo or Angi Vera. IMO the very best movies have the ability to open up our eyes to aspects of the real world that we might not have been fully aware of before. That may be too rarified a standard, but I can't think of any other way to separate the merely great from the sublime. This doesn't mean that we'd all look at the same movies and come to the same conclusion about them, but it does mean that it's the most important question to pose.

The only older actor I thought was credibly paired with Audrey was Rex Harrison in My Fair Lady, and that's only because their relationship was much more subtle and less overtly romantic. The most inane pairing she had was with Gary Cooper in Love In The Afternoon, who could have passed for her grandfather, and biologically he could have been.

"Crushes"? If you mean vintage actresses whose combination of looks and screen personae would make me want to get to know them, then it'd be Louise Brooks Clara Bow Barbara Stanwyck Glenda Farrell Jean Harlow Bette Davis up to about The Petrified Forest Ida Lupino Katharine Hepburn Audrey Hepburn Ann Sheridan Priscilla Lane Luise Rainer Myrna Loy Susan Hayward Sylvia Sidney Jeanne Moreau (if she qualifies as vintage) Lauren Bacall Anouk Aimee Cyd Charisse Lilli Palmer Carole Lombard Rita Hayworth Jeanne Crain Kim Novak Lee Remick But if you just based it on looks alone, then add Loretta Young Kay Francis Gene Tierney Ava Gardner Jennifer Jones Jane Greer Lana Turner Brigitte Bardot

I limited my list to ten titles. I've seen some of these movies at least 50 times over the years. That is truly amazing. The only movie I've watched more than a dozen times without getting tired of it is Reefer Madness, and that's probably because 99% of the time I was collecting a dollar from every college student I was showing it to.

Are films that "one never gets tired of" synonymous with one's favorite films? Not always. In a lot of cases the only reason I'm not yet tired of them is that I haven't seen them enough times to give them a true test. I had Casablanca on my Top 10 list for many years, but now after seeing it for about the 13th time it doesn't even make my top 50, and maybe not even my top 100. It's not that I think any less of it, but now doesn't grab me the way it did the first 10 or 12 times. Same with The Lady Eve, though that one's only slipped from my 2nd favorite comedy to about my 4th or 5th. It may be just that I've never been a big fan of Henry Fonda, even though in this case he's perfectly cast as Stanwyck's foil. As a general rule, if a "serious" movie can make it past a second viewing, it's likely to be one that I can watch at least once a year forever. OTOH an "entertainment" movie has an easier time making it through 3 or 4 viewings, but after that I get kind of wary of seeing it without a long lapse in time, for fear of the "Casablanca" effect. Of course I'll never, *ever* get tired of Reefer Madness. There are just too many great lines and scenes for it ever to wear thin.

The only movies that wore me out from overwatching have been Casablanca and The Lady Eve, though it took about a dozen viewings in each case to do it. I still love them, but I now ration them to about once every 2 or 3 years. But I still can't get enough of these movies, which I've already seen at least 3 times and can't wait to see again: The Battle of Algiers (seen at least a dozen times) Reefer Madness (seen close to 100 times, though mostly for profit) Angi Vera (stuck on about 10 viewings because of lack of availability) Kapo The Killers Out of the Past Goodfellas A Bronx Tale Mean Streets It's a Wonderful Life Breaking Away Short Cuts Boyfriends and Girlfriends 42nd Street A Star Is Born (Garland version) Nightmare Alley Bombshell Libeled Lady Sons of the Desert The Fields segment in If I Had a Million The Sheep Has Five Legs All About Eve Baby Face Mildred Pierce Sudden Fear The Search The Asphalt Jungle Thieves' Highway Laura Bringing Up Baby So Big (Stanwyck version) Hard Times The Hard Way Gilda Bringing Up Baby Every Kurosawa / Mifune non-Samurai collaboration Every Jean Gabin movie TCM showed in August of 2012 The Crowd The Unholy Three (either sound or silent version) The Penalty (Chaney) Greed (the 4 hour version) Time Limit Pandora's Box M (Lorre version) And probably at least 100 more, not counting films I've only seen once or twice and want to see again.