Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

stlgal38

TCM_allow
  • Posts

    858
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Posts posted by stlgal38

  1. How ironic this should be the top topic this morning, as I have an update: I am 39 today. But thankfully unable to change my name.

    Yeah age ain't nothin but a number especially in this medium. I go for content.

    It is kinda nice to have an idea of who your talking to but I don't make that a 'deciding' or 'rule-out' factor.

  2. I've noticed these sub-stellar romantic chemistries before, and I'm not sure it's all a casting flaw. Other factors (I think) include poor direction on the love angle. Of the films you mention, only George Cukor (My Fair Lady) had some experience in the primarily romantic genre - and they were few. Good direction would have brought out the 'animal attraction' if you will - or at least detected the lack thereof on the dailies during filming.

    And I know what you mean about Grace Kelly. She was way too pristine to come across as the least bit "wanton". As far as Audrey Hepburn, her choice of characters seemed too naive and flippant to be considered sexual (with the possible exception of "Sabrina").

    Another consideration is that perhaps the screenplay called for a somewhat one-sided attraction, as I suspected in "To Catch a Thief".

  3. Well, cinemetal, my handle says it all. I'm 38, female (gal), from St. Louis (stl), Missouri, USA. Although the "l" looks like an "I" - so I answer to stigal, stig.. you name it.

    I enjoy your posts. You have competence in a broad gamut of films and you write very well.

    Welcome aboard.

© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...