JamesJazGuitar

Which version?

My off the cuff guess would be Donald Crisp. He started in movies in 1911 and ended his career in 1963. Edited by: jamesjazzguitar on Mar 20, 2013 5:15 PM

I'll have to check out Garson's version because I really enjoy the Crawford version. While I can see Garson being able to 'keep up' with Crawford I really wonder if Wilding fills the shoes of William Powell. Also the supporting players in the Crawford version were first class (Morgan, Bruce, etc..).

I remember seeing that CANDACE BERGEN episode. She was really cute. I believe I saw this when her character Murphy Brown became a political debate, but I also already knew her from movies (mostly The Sand Piper), and it was neat to see her discuss her famous dad and have fun with Groucho.

Please note that when one says 'less to blame' it doesn't mean blameless. I only point this out because you used the term blameless here. It is rare for 'the people' to be blameless. As others here say; there are degrees of blame. I compared the citizens of NK to those of Germany in the 30s only to say that I find NK citizens less to blame for the actions of their government than the Germans of the 30s. Again, less to blame doesn't equate to blameless.

NK has a more closed society than Germany did during the early 30s when Hitler rose to power. For example, in NK there wasn't an election that placed either Kim in power. In Germany there was an election and, at the time, the German media wasn't completely controlled by those seeking power. But if one wishes to generally blame the people more for their leader (in any country historical situation) than not, that is fine with me since I tend to lean that way. i.e. often history focuses solely on the leaders as a way to give 'the people' an out.

You raise what to me is the million dollar question here: what role do 'the people' play with regards to the actions of a country under a dictatorship? Take North Korea today. It is folly to put even a majority of the blame on Kim, the new young leader. The group that gets the vast majority of the blame is the NK military establishment. This group put the younger Kim in power and they could remove him if they wished. But anyone not in the NK military establishment is powerless. As for 30s Germany; Well I think there were more than 'some Germans' citizens that supported the German military establishment (a lot higher percentage than say NK citizens) and thus I hold the overall German people more responsible for the actions of the Nazis during their reign, than I do the actions of the NK government today. My view of the Italians during the 30s 40s is similar to the Germans, but to a lesser degree.

Eric Blore is always a funny servant. He was great in Follies Bergere (1935), which I saw for the first time last week on TCM (with Merle Oberon looking fantastic), and of course It's Love I'm After as well as many other roles. Blore's strangest role was in The Shanghai Gesture (but one could say that about all the actors in that picture!).

Sorry but your subsequent post has me confused. In the first one you say Sly and Day had a fling. Then you post: The meeting lasted maybe 15 minutes,,,, So they had a fling in this 15 minutes? OR did they meet again later on? OR when you say " I suppose I didn't help' you meant that by saying they had a fling, you contributed to spreading an untruth? (if one is to believe Day).

Not sure I'm following you with regards to why a movie (not just Of Human Bondage), should NOT be remade. Are you saying that when the original movie is 'spot on' there shouldn't be a remake? i.e. that remakes should be reserved for movies based on high quality source material (book, original story), that failed. So is the Howard Davis version 'spot on' or was the story just not worth remaking or???? Of course maybe you where not commenting on remakes in general and I admit I do react when I see someone say 'no need' as it relates to remakes. The topic really interest me.

The wealthiest actor on the planet is likely someone like Amy Irving; i.e. an actor that acquired wealth from means other than acting. (in her case the over 100 million divorce settlement from Spielberg). Jackson is top box office not wealthiest. As you noted Jackson is top box office because he is mostly a character actor, since character actors are featured in more movies than lead actors.

Hey, if I didn't like you I could be offended by that crack. Yea, as soon as the waiter said something I when 'duh'! Of course it was her! My only defense (and a weak one at that), is the setting (Johnny Rocket is a burger joint and thus 'low end' for the area - which I believe now was on Melrose and not Rodeo drive) and she looked like just an everyday gal. But yea, that sign language should of tipped my off especially since I saw the movie Children Of A Lesser God just a few months before and it was one of my favorite movies of the year. I guess I was really into my Johnny Rocket burger and their fries!

This reply is to both LavenderBlue's reply to me and Hibi's post here; As explained by Lavender I can accept why Chris would have an affair. As I said my issue with Chris wasn't that she had an affair but that she continue to lie about it after the killing took place. I also understand why Chris would NOT tell her husband before there was a need to (i.e. before the killing). i.e. that there was nothing to be gained by telling him she had an affair why he was away. But after the killing hiding this was just silly and dangerous (from a legal POV). Of course she had to hide the truth so there could be a blackmail and thus a story to tell in this movie. i.e. if she had come clean right after the killing there would be no story to tell other than her husband packing his bags. Hey, if people in noirs acted logically the noir genre wouldn't exist! Edited by: jamesjazzguitar on Mar 12, 2013 6:23 PM

I believe we have discussed this before and I agree with you completely on Ann's WB years of the late 30s and early 40s. Yes, unrealized potential, but of course this was true for all the WB gals while Davis was at her peek. (DeHavilland (best work on load out), Lupino, Sheridan). I love all those WB films you mention, but as you know all of them feature Ann in a secondary role. Again, very typical for WB movies of the period unless the picture was a Davis vehicle. I think Ann gave a very good performance in The Unfaithful. Thus it wasn't Ann I was knocking, but the screenplay. e.g. I feel the movie would of been better if Ann's character really loved her lover instead of whatever it was that made her wish to betray her husband and sleep with that artist.

Well since we are name dropping: I was at Johnny Rockets on Rodeo drive in Beverly Hills eating at the counter. A women came in to order some food and sat right next to me. She had to write down the order and used some sign language. I looked at the women and she looked like someone I knew but I didn't make the connect. This was in March a few weeks after the Oscars in 1986. After the women left with her food the waiter said; well that is our first star of the day. It was Marlee Matlin, just weeks after she won the Oscar for best actress. I felt like a fool for not recognizing her, but she was dressed on the down low and wasn't wearing make up. Matlin is staring in a new TV show and today she looks better than she did that day back in 1986.

From what I read the later Star War movies Jackson was in were key to putting him over the top. Ford had the Jones and early Star War movies and he was way ahead until the last 15 or so years when his career really started to wind down (and box office take for his movies was limited), while Jackson, while not a star in most of the movies he was in (e.g. that large shark killer movie), was in a lot of movies that did either did well or OK at the box office. Edited by: jamesjazzguitar on Mar 12, 2013 2:55 PM

My point was related to those that implied the role of Mildred required a better looking women than Davis (e.g. Novak or Parker) in order to make the actions of Philip more believable. I agree with you that Philip actions are believable since, as someone with a low self image due to his deformity, it didn't take a '10' to get him to act like a fool. I did misspeak in that last sentence. i.e. for those that think looks are a key factor in Mildred's hold on Philip, one could say that the better looking the women the more she could mistreat a man like Philip. But I'm from the camp that says her looks were only a minor factor; as you say it really is about Philip and what is going on in his head.

I don't find Sheridan's character to be sympathetic, but more just pathetic. Ok, she was unfaithful. I can forgive her for that but as soon as her prior lover was killed she needed to come clean. Not so much for her husband but from legal reasons. So I find her very annoying. The performance of Arden and Geray (the blackmailer), are very good and the movie has it moments and it is nice to see Sheridan given a lead role like this but the actions of her character are just too much for me. The Letter is indeed a classic. As for Davis and overacting; I don't feel that is a very nuanced POV. Yes, when Davis roars she can get near that line but during her peek period she was able to convey a full range of emotions. e.g. the Dark Victory ending.

I missed seeing this 64 release but I'll make sure I see it when it is on again. Are you saying that Novak or Parker are more believable because they are more attractive than Davis? (which I agree they are, especially Parker). I don't think it was looks that attracted Philip to Mildred. It surely wasn't looks that keep him from removing her from his life after she showed her true colors. So my view is looks are not the main motive for Philips actions. Instead it is his misguided nature and the fact he viewed himself as deformed. So in the Novak or Parker version do the women treat Philip with more respect? i.e. are they just a little nicer? That would make the story more believable.

Well anytime one gives a top 10 (or so), list someone can say 'what NO XYZ'. So why not post your top 10 so we can compare it to the list already provided. Note I had Joan as #10. But since I had Grahame as #12 I got 'no Gloria' when I posted.

I would love to see Novak's performance in Of Human Bondage. I'm not much of a fan of her since she often has a blank or bored look to her. i.e. like she isn't really all there,, very low key,, So I would love to see now Novak plays a role that is 'over the top' by design like Mildred in Bondage. Edited by: jamesjazzguitar on Mar 11, 2013 10:04 PM

The stat I saw had Jackson as number one total box office (i.e sum of gross box office for all the movies an actor was in). Note that being in a movie as a minor player still counts in this stat. Harrison Ford was second.

SOTM Dec. 2008: Joseph Cotton Walker and Andrews no. Edited by: jamesjazzguitar on Mar 10, 2013 6:57 PM

As I already, somewhat said, to me the 'not for me' comment relates to getting married because it is 'time' or because of social conventions, so I believe we agree that 'not for me' could also apply to Ben and not just marrying a guy like Carl (one she doesn't really love). Edited by: jamesjazzguitar on Mar 10, 2013 3:01 PM

My take on Novak's Remick is similar to your take. I don't think it was about the studio system or those that "controlled" her career but more about her own personality and not wanting to make waves (i.e. appear pushy or difficult). She just wasn't a fighter when it came to demanding roles. Didn't she mention that she didn't know how Remick got those rolls? i.e. if Remick had to fight for them or not. So my guess is that Novak used Remick as an example only because Novak liked some of the more complex roles Remick stared in during both of their 'peak' years and that they were from the same generation of actresses.