JamesJazGuitar

My wife tends to fall asleep very shortly after we start watching TV. So often she will find something on TV (TCM, Food Network are our main choices), to watch and I'll say 'we have seen this already'. Well I have, but she has only seen the start! So I used to say I didn't wish to watch it again and this created some tension. Thus to avoid that I now just say 'ok'. Then after 15 minutes or so I change the channel since she is asleep. But every once in a while she says 'hey why are you changing the channel!'. Well because you're eyes were closed!

Yes, someone is very incorrect here. They should read the prior replies to a post before replying, especially when stating someone is incorrect, otherwise it just looks like someone is picking on someone needlessly.

Your example of President's is a good one but unlike with studio era movies the possible choices of Presidents is very limited. i.e. there are thousand of movie choices. But the only way I can see to ensure variety would be to ask a potential guest host to make 10 choices and then select 3 movies from that list of 10. NOW if most of their 10 choices are "vanilla", well this means the guest host is vanilla and thus it is time to select a different guess host.

Well Hartman did die when he was murdered. i.e. the result of being murdered is death. To die tragically implies the death wasn't the cause of a voluntary act on Hartman's part. But one could also say Hartman married tragically.

The Vandals are a local band (Orange Country CA) and I remember seeing them play at parties here and I knew some people that went to high school with them.

joyrider; About a year ago I had the problem you mention as it relates to 'reply to thread', but I used that to reply to your post (i.e. what you're reading here was used by doing so), and I'm not having a problem. Are you using a current version of IE?

Based on what I was reading Kay didn't enjoy those final months at WB based on how the studio treated her but I'm sure when she got that paycheck that helped lighten her mood. So at the end of the day, in my opinion, Kay got the last laugh over Jack Warner. As for Hedren, if another producer felt she was bankable they would of helped her get out of that Hitchcock contract or offered Hitchcock enough dough for him to agree to load her out. The fact this didn't occur (as far as I know), is to me a reflection of how the industry viewed Hedren at the time.

I always confuse Della with the Skipper, both being TV stars and all.

Kid Galahad is a fine, classic WB movie from that period i.e. it just smells of what WB was doing at that time (in a very good way). The movie has a great cast but isn't a star vehicle in the typical sense, for any of them. Of course watching the movie decades after it's release, knowing what the future holds for Bogart and Davis, impacts how I perceived the movie. I should also add that Bette Davis is also one of the key reasons I'm a studio era movie fan. I got interested in these movies because of the Warner male actors; Flynn, Cagney, and Bogie. So one day I watch Marked Women because Bogie was in it. Well Davis just floored me so instead of only focusing on the WB male movie vehicles I branched out to the WB Davis output, and of course got a special treat with Kid Galahad as another movie with both of these stars. Edited by: jamesjazzguitar on Oct 26, 2012 3:04 PM

Thanks for the informative info. So it looks like while Hedren was under that Hitchcock contract she was getting paid for doing little or nothing. i.e. Hitchcock wasn't using her and refused to load her out to others. Do you know if Hedren tried to buy out this contract? I was just reading about Kay Francis and her final days at Warner. Kay signed a 7 year contract at over 5K a week. The last 2 or so years of that contract Jack Warner didn't wish to star her in movies since her movies were not selling. While both sides wanted to end the contract Jack wasn't willing to pay her much to end it. So while Kay hated those last few years (e.g. she reported to the lot each day and was assigned to training young actors and doing reading with them since if she refused any assignment she would of been put on suspension), she liked that 5K a week, so she stayed with WB until the contract ended.

No one was comparing the lyrics. But would you label Hart a songwriter? I wouldn't. I would say Hart was a lyricist while Rogers was a composer, and Cole Porter was a songwriter. Dylan is indeed a songwriter but as a composer I would rate him only 'so so' but as a lyricist he was great.

While I remain neutral on the subject of if Hitchcock tried to take advantage of Hedren sexually I agree with you that regardless, Hitchcock isn't responsible for her failure to have a successful career. Hollywood is about making money and due to her staring in two Hitchcock films Hedren was known to the public. Thus if other producers felt she had what it took to star in their productions she would of been offered the job.

I view Dylan as one of the greatest lyricist that ever lived but not songwriters. From a musician's POV the harmonies are typically very simple. To me a songwriter is someone like Cole Porter; someone that wrote wonderful lyrics as well as complex and interesting harmonies. As for rock songwriters someone like Paul Simon, especially his later work, has both the lyrical content as well the harmonic.

I'll have to check out the February schedule, but are you saying that during Oscar month TCM will be showing more post 68 Oscar winning movies than they normally do? Is that a change in terms of frequency from what TCM has done in prior years? I know others feel that Oscar month has a lot of overplayed movies (and I tend to agree), but I don't remember TCM showing a lot more post 68 movies during that month. But as I have said before I also understand that TCM wishes to attract younger viewers and these viewers tend to only like color movies. Oh well, I always have my guitar!

Are you assuming that the use of the last name implies a certain type or level of status? If that is the case than I can see your point that the use of the last name Allyson in that context would be silly since she isn't close to the same status as Garbo. I didn't use the last name of Arthur to denote her status as an actress in the history of movies. i.e. there was no hidden intent for only using last names. I was just typing and wasn't thinking along those lines. But if I was trying to imply a certain status, I believe Jean Arthur can be referenced only with a last name because, at least to me, she is one of leading actresses of the golden era. Yea, right up there with Greta, Bette, Barbara etc.. Now here my intention of using only first names is to imply a certain status. Yea someone might think I mean Barbara Hale but then most of us would just laugh at them ).

I'm serious when I say that I hope TCM doesn't show more post studio era movies. First I think there is no definition for what is 'classic'. Second, yes, every decade has good movies and movies I like. I just happen to like movies from the 30s - 50s a lot more than movies from later decades. So as many have said before, the name for TCM really should be 'studio era movies'. Movie made prior to 1968 or so. While I'm ok with the TCM showing post 68 movies and understand why they do this, my preference is that this is limited to special events e.g. TCM underground. If more than say 5% or so of the programming was devoted to post 68 movies it would weaken what I have come to know as the TCM brand. So I would rather there be a second network that showed post 68 'classic' movies. For any product when a brand gets too wide the value of the brand is weaken. Take Jazz stations. The one I use to listen to now is so broad (i.e. features so many different types of so called 'jazz' from every era), that, at least to me, it no longer has an identify.

Don't know why that reply was to me since I didn't make those comments. What I did post is that it is very difficult to know what the truth is in these situations. (even if all the parties are alive to give their side). Just call me Switzerland!

I believe John considered Run For Your Life as the song he wish he never wrote since it is a very hateful song. Yoko really gave him a hard time for writing that one. But yea, the music is good. While Rubber Soul is one of my top 2 -3 favorite Beatles albums I have seen where critics have labeled it as being too wimpy. i.e. to folk rock. While I can see that especially when compared to the albums that what follow it (Revolver, Pepper), to me Rubber Soul is a good balance between the more simple very pop early Beatle's style and their 'harder' material. Also the harmony singing by the lads was tops at this point. i.e. as time moved on John and Paul didn't sing as much together as they did during this middle period. As for the George songs; well to me this relates to that harmony singing. Really having John and Paul as your back up singer! How could that not be great! So while I think later Harrison songs are more 'complete' (stronger in terms of songwriting structure), those later songs don't have that same backup singing due to the lads not being in the studio at the same time.

I saw Letter From An Unknown Women the last time TCM showed it and I enjoyed it and Joan is very good it in, but as you note it still is very similar to her other performances, but granted with more nuance. I just think Olivia has more enjoyable early work e.g. the movies with Flynn, the WB comedies, like The Great Garrick, It's Love I'm After, Four's a Crowd, etc... While these movies were built around the male star Olivia often plays a strong women character and that is what makes her attractive to me. Then there are the larger roles in other movies like The Strawberry Blond, and Hold Back the Dawn, as well as the high profile stuff like GWTW, and her post WWII run of To Each Her Own, The Snake Pit, and The Heiress. But like I said I'm a big fan of Joan and like you I hope TCM shows more of her work and that rights issues don't prevent them from doing so.

You two are very funny, but really is there another classic movie actress with the name of Arthur? As for the Kinks, they are my 2nd favorite band behind The Beatles, and Arthur is indeed a landmark album. As for Authur Godfrey, wasn't a Lombard movie named after him? Of course I could just say that anyone with taste would know who I was refering to.

I don't recall saying Curtiz was a great director. I'm very much a fence sitter. What I did say was that he was the director of many great films and that speaks for itself, but I also asked many 'what if' questions very similar to the point your making as to would a WB production be a lot different if it was directed by someone else. I end up with 'who knows' (sitting on the fence) while you say it would end up being just as good. But I do feel you're overstating your POV with a 'monkey could of directed it'. To me that is too black and white. i.e. it implies Curtiz made NO contribution to the end product. But when you say '. Greatness are those who can give great performances again and again and again', well Curtiz was the director of one great movie after another. So I don't see how that statement supports your overall POV on Curtiz. Again, I have no idea if he was 'great' or not, only that he was the director of many movies I classify as great. If I had to take a stand I would say the WB production company was more responsible than Curtiz but that it is folly to say Curtiz didn't contribute.

Well you're right about Bette. My top 5 favorite actresses are: Davis, Stanwyck, DeHavilland, Lombard and Arthur. As for Joan I'm very fond of her and I like a lot of her early movies but I just don't see as much depth as I see in many other actresses. But she did the shy, repressed type of gal as good as anyone. I still say that Joan and Olivia keep on living because each wants to still outdo the other!

As other have noted it is hard to determine who is telling the truth and what the actual truth is in a 'he said she said' type of situation especially after one of the parties is dead and cannot defend themselves. But if this is the case how do you or anyone else know who are the 'big fat liars'? i.e. isn't it just as much folly to assume Hedren or others are liars as it is to assume they are telling the truth?

I agree that the ending is all too neat. What could of changed in the doctor to make him fall in love with Belinda when he was never in love with her before. So I'm not buying it. It would of been better as you say; both free to go their separate ways as better people. i.e. people that would find love in the future but not with each other.

As for the people seemed real to me comment, well to my wife Boyer was a little too real, in a Lolitia sort of way. Yea, young girls will have crushes on older men but for Boyer to not put a stop to it when she was young or not distance himself from it was somewhat gross. All I saw was a misguided teen and a man that encouraged the attention. His wife was right. The so called love was really lust. Yea, I understand the censors but I would rather have the movie be like Lotitia. i.e. just sleep with the teen if that is what you want and vise versa. If that isn't really what the movie was about (lust between teen girl and adult man), than at the end of the day the movie is really about nothing.