JamesJazGuitar

In addition as we have discussed, new adaptations bring attention to prior versions. I.e. people that have never seen the original will often check the original one out after viewing a "current" adaptation. The was true with the last adaptation of The Women with Meg Ryan: DVD rentals of the 1940 version went up. Only in rare cases does a new adaptation leads to less viewership of the prior versions ; like when a studio own the rights to a prior version and suppresses it, like what was done with the last adaptation of The Great Gatsby.

The 1939 film version is not being remade. I just don't understand why people can't understand that. PS: if the actual point here is that a new adaptation will not be as good of a film as the 1939 version, that is understandable. I.e. the odds of that are 1 \ 100 since the 1939 version is a masterpiece. But that has nothing to do with producers deciding to fund project to produce a new adaptation.

Next: Song about birds

Good point; I would add that during the 30s, many "B" pictures were based on "original" screenplays that were quickly written based on common storylines \ plot devices (boy meets girl, etc). Few of these screenplays were highly creative. This is why such works were call "programmers"! Hey, I love a lot of these films since I enjoy the actors of the era, and a good director and screenwriter can take a well worn story and using Hollywood magic create something highly enjoyable. BUT I don't call these "B" programmers highly creative works. (compared to taking a book with complex characters and storylines, and reducing that into 90 minutes or so of cinema magic).

Yea, he only decided he wanted to stop being a player when he knew he wasn't going to be dealt anymore cards.

If Eddie really cared, he would have quickly married her so she could collect his pension.

Gabor playing a Fender. Cool.

It really doesn't matter what either of you write, or even Hallie; Tom couldn't read.

Gentlemen Prefer Blondes, and The Fuzzy Pink Nightgown.

What really has me wondering is when did Henry Travers ever have such bushy eyebrows. Ah, the mystery of the day.

Watched (again) last night, a fine film I'm sure you are aware of on MOVIES-TV. And don't worry I didn't cry. But I did notice the hard as nails dialog, especially by Joan.

I see Harrigan, and Travers, but where is lead actor Claude Rains!!!! This poster is all messed up!!! Who can I call to make a complaint!! Oh, wait,,,, never mind.

As I said last week, CNN's website (under Paid Content), has been running this byline: The Truth is, Doris Day, Wasn't as wholesome as we all thought. Below is the picture used today. Again, this is "paid content" which means that CNN didn't create said content, but just gets paid to put in on their website. Still if CNN had any class they wouldn't run such trash, no matter how much their cut is. But what I found most interesting is why LikeSwifty (name of content provider), would select Day. How many users of this site are interested in trash like this? Someone like Meghan Markle, I could see but an actress like Day that hasn't made a film for over 40 years?

He did make an impact on jazz. A fine musician.

What hooked me on Stanwyck was this scene from The Lady Eve. Just a great combination of wit, sass, and beauty. One of the most versatile actresses with first rate performances in almost every genre.

Well now that you mention it,,,,

I agree that her allure in The Lady Eve was very strong. 1941 was a great year for her with The Lady Eve, Meet John Doe, You Belong to Me, and Ball of Fire.

That was what I was trying to imply: That Stanwyck was the better actress (#2 in my book), but that Mayo was indeed sexier. (but Babs is still very sexy in Ball of Fire,, which for me is her most sexist performance).

Funny but when I did that write-up I was going to add: "and Danny Kaye, isn't too annoying in this film". Yea, a little of Kaye goes a long way, but in this film, he is controlled enough that he doesn't impact my enjoyment of the film.

The Big Sleep is what got me into studio-era films over 30 years ago. E.g. I went to a revival theater in Hollywood and saw the film on the big screen. The second time I went I sat in the front row. Carmen's legs (Martha Vickers) in that opening scene where like 50 feel tall! (but I had to wait to drive home since my eyesight was impacted). I know most of the dialog by heart since I have seen the film over 20 times (at least). Also there is the pre-release version, shown only to troops overseas which is very interesting. If you haven't seen that one, check it out. (Hawks was asked to add Bogie and Bacall scenes after the two were married and that was the version released after the war ended). As much as I love the film, I can't say it is the "quintessential film noir" mainly because of the Bogie and Bacall romantic angle (the pre-release is more "noir"), and the good-guy wins ending. Out of the Pass, Double Indemnity, and Criss Cross are more quintessential noir films as it relates to the noir themes of a doomed noir protagonist and a classic femme fatale.

Have you seen the more musical adaptation of Ball of Fire, A Song is Born, with Danny Kaye and Virginia Mayo? Same basic storyline but with Kaye as a music professer instead of a linguist like Cooper. Since both films are different I don't really compare them (or use that bogus term "remake" for the latter). Being a jazz musician, I love how jazz music is used in A Song is Born and there are some nice musical scenes. (of course Ball of Fire has that great opening with Stanwyck and drummer Gene Krupa). Bottom line both films are worth seeing. While Mayo isn't in Stanwyck's league (only a handful are IMO), she is very sexy and does a great job in the film. The supporting case of the older men in Ball of Fire is first rate, but A Song is Born features, Benny Goodman, Tommy Dorsey, Louis Armstrong, Lionel Hampton, and a host of other fine jazz musicians. The film is from RKO so TCM shows it. (both films are directed by great-in-all-genres, Howard Hawks).

Crossfire is a well known film at this forum since it is a noir with two iconic noir actors in Mitchum and Ryan. One of Robert Young best dramatic performances as well as an early noir film for Gloria Grahame, as a hard nosed dame. Also, since it was released in the same year as Gentleman's Agreement (1947), and deals with a similar topic, the two films are often linked. I prefer how Crossfire conveys it's "message" over how it is done in Gentleman's Agreement.

Never heard of this film until now, but it sounds like it would be entertaining. As noted, interesting cast, and I always find Martha Hyer interesting and Winters and Walston make a funny duo. Van Johnson has his hands full!

Yes, Thaddeus, is the correct answer. (sorry for the wait).