JamesJazGuitar
-
Posts
35,217 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
52
Posts posted by JamesJazGuitar
-
-
14 minutes ago, Dargo said:
Nope, can't say that I did.
But on the other hand, I DID think of and at first wondered why Richard Basehart's name wasn't on this poster that started this thread...
And 'cause that sure looks like Richard Basehart there, don't ya think?
(...and even though he's not in the film)
I agree that it looks like Richard Basehart. It is Richard Rober. I know him from the noir films I Married a Communist (Women on Pier 13), Backfire and The File on Thelma Jordan.
I don't see Hanks at all.
-
1
-
-
30 minutes ago, unwatchable said:
LA? Yeah, that would about tear it for me.
The list of films I wish to see, but have yet to see grows shorter each week. I'm coming to a point where I could do without TCM.
I'm curious how TCM moving to L.A. would impact your TCM experience. Of course it wouldn't change how one views a film and the odds are very low such a move would impact what films TCM programmers select.
Thus I really just don't understand how such a move would "about tear it" for anyone.
But hey, to each their own.
-
16 minutes ago, TopBilled said:
Well TCM does show its share of films in the public domain. I think that is because the films fit a certain theme, and also because they don't cost a single penny to put into the schedule so that helps offset some programming costs.
Since TCM has a time during the week set aside to showing some silent films, they could easily add in a few extra freebies for viewers. Even if these can easily be found on YouTube.
I think to some extent the channel has to accommodate silent film otherwise it would be accused of ignoring a big chunk of Hollywood history which would be bad P.R.
As for what is not digitalized at this point, I can't comment on that since I don't know. A lot of silent films are still in existence. Including foreign silent films.
Furthermore I would say any sound film that is not marked for preservation by the Library of Congress is in danger of becoming lost in time.
Are you saying TCM should show more silent films than what they already show? E.g. increase the number of silent films shown on Sunday evening, or add another time day \ time slot for silent films?
I do wonder if TCM has conducted any surveys on this; again, my gut tells me the vast majority of TCM regular viewers do not wish for more silent films, and this is even more the case with the occasional TCM viewer. But hey, maybe I'm wrong here. I just know I don't wish for TCM to increase the number of silent films they show, from what they already show.
-
18 hours ago, sewhite2000 said:
I believe they are, although I saw at least one poster recently posit that the recent overhaul of the look of the station is just a precusor for a move to LA. Unsure what the reality is regarding that.
I could see TCM moving out of Atlanta Georgia for political reasons. L.A. would be a logical choice; Texas would not.
-
1
-
1
-
-
I would go to Hollywood and revival theaters to see Bogart films like The Big Sleep, Casablanca and Dead Reckoning.
As for a memorable experience: I went to Dead Reckoning with a girlfriend; When the driving scene where Bogie tells Liz Scott that he wishes he could shrink women so that he could put them in his pocket and then make them bigger when he had a use for them, the women in the audience booed, while the men clapped.
-
1
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, TopBilled said:
Isn't everything up to 1925 now in the public domain?
I'm not sure, but my understanding is a lot of silent films are now lost; i.e. they were never converted to a digital format.
But if there is a public domain digital format of a film in the public domain then anyone can show that film, and that supports my point that PBS or other type of public broadcasting is the best place for such films. I don't think a network that need to break-even (if not show a profit), can afford to show silent films since there isn't enough of a market willing to pay for them.
-
1 hour ago, LsDoorMat said:
To be fair, the English language poster for Desk Set isn't much better than the Spanish language ones. It looks like it is about a wild holiday party.
To me this poster communicates less of what the movie is about than the Spanish one. While the robot is silly at least there is what looks like a computer keyboard: some reference that a computer was part of the storyline.
You're on-target that the US poster makes it looks like the film is just about romance and a Christmas office party. If the target audience was mostly women, that would make more sense, from a PR point of view, than implying the film had anything to do with computers.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, txfilmfan said:
Here's one in Spanish...
Imagine going into the theater thinking you're going to see Spencer Tracy marry a robot. Or maybe he's married to a robot and falls in love with Katharine Hepburn?
In case you don't read Spanish, the title is literally "His Other Wife". This was the title in Spain.
In Mexico, the title was "Cosas de mujeres" - "Women's Things"
In the UK the film was released as "His Other Women". I always wondered why the film was called Desk Set in the USA.
I would have called the film Pink Slip since to me the main theme of the film is the fear that technology will replace workers, and there are scenes in the film related to pink slips since that was a common term used when employees were terminated.
But this being a Tracy \ Hepburn film and one where they do end-up-together, I can see the need for the title (and posters), to reflect that. Thus I'm surprised Fox went with such a generic title as Desk Set.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Hibi said:
Thanks for your support! Joan appreciates it.
Funny but I just re-looked at the photo I posted of Joan and asked myself "why is Joan wearing an orange for a broach?".
It took me a second to realize it was an orange or lemon wedge on her drink!
-
5
-
-
28 minutes ago, Sepiatone said:
Well, there's no reason to expect anything less.
Sepiatone
True; I just wanted to show Hibi some support in her quest to keep this topic fresh and active: TCM - please,,,, Make Joan Bennett Star of the Month.
We are not going to be denied! Here is Joan saying "what did I ever do to deserve this".
-
1
-
-
Just now, Sepiatone said:
I regret not being able to remember specifics and provide images, but I do recall often when I was a kid, I'd go to see a movie based on what was on the poster and discover none of the monsters in the flick looked as scary(or cool) as the ones the poster had on it.
Sepiatone
I was around 8 when One Million Years BC came out. Like a lot of young boys I was really interested in dinosaurs so I told my dad this was a must see film.
I also asked that he get me a film poster. He just blew me off and I never got a poster. It wasn't until years later that I understood mom was the one that vetoed the idea.
Dinosaurs weren't the reason my dad and older brother wanted to see this film!
-
4
-
3
-
-
On 8/4/2021 at 7:40 PM, Biffeliott said:
I was a regular at the The Silent Movie Theater in Hollywood for about a decade. During a stretch of several years it showcased the musical talent of the one and only Bob Mitchell. He got started playing when silents were new releases. A rare treat to hear him imitate the sounds of locomotives on his tiny keyboard. Bob played 5 shows a week at SMT until he passed several years ago, and the movies stopped when the theater closed due to a me-too scandal. Old Town Music Hall in El Segundo is keeping alive the gift of old time movies, with a Wurlitzer organ, but is a long haul, even for me.
I really miss the theater and its packed house for the great silent classics. Of all the places in the world, the home of moviemaking needs to nurture the art of silent cinema. Get with it TCM! What can you do with your library of silents?
TCM has to lease films, even from their parent company Time Warner. That original Ted Turner library of films no longer exist.
Also, my understanding is that library didn't have a lot of silent films.
It is much more likely U.C.L.A. will be able to preserve (restore\maintain), more silent films than anyone else. But even if that was the case who would present them?
Sadly there just isn't much of an audience and networks like TCM do have to maintain a certain customer base. Public broadcasting is likely the only option (where films are donated so there is no up front leasing cost).
-
3 minutes ago, LsDoorMat said:
Maybe not enough material for an entire thread, but I have seen this happen a couple of times. Yesterday I watched a film entitled "The Well" that was about a five year old black girl that goes missing in a very racially mixed town. The suspect is a white man and pretty soon rumors fly and there are tensions that could start a race riot. Very frank storytelling on this subject for an American film in 1951. But I had to laugh when I saw one of the movie posters:
I think this may be the cover of a DVD, but the artwork was originally a movie poster. The poster makes you believe that if you buy a ticket you will be seeing some kind of torrid romance. Instead it is a film on racial issues. I don't even remember seeing a scene like this in the film. Maybe the scene was cut.
I wonder if this was a poster used for PR purposes but only in the southern states. This is one of the main reasons for some "odd" (at best), posters; E.g. black actors wouldn't be shown.
Oh, and great topic. I just have to do some homework!
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Det Jim McLeod said:
I always thought Glenn Ford was miscast as the shifty outlaw in 3:10 To Yuma (1957). I felt Robert Mitchum or Richard Widmark would have been great in this role.
When I read about the overall story line for 3:10 to Yuma I asked myself why Glenn Ford was cast in the film, but after I saw it I felt Ford did a very good job (since the outlaw was understated as written). Mitchum and his type of screen persona would have worked perfectly. Widmark: by this stage of his career he had toned-it-down so I can see that working but still not as well as Mitchum.
But one thing I have always pondered was if the roles of Ford and Van Heflin were reserved. My gut tells me that would have been better casting. Van Heflin, comes off as more shifty and devious than Ford.
-
4
-
-
Wow, very nice photo of Joan and one I can't recall seeing. Such style and class.
-
2
-
-
9 hours ago, Thompson said:
Mickey Rooney was just super in that boxing movie with Jackie Gleason and Anthony Quinn, the name of the movie escapes me, but Rooney (and Gleason) were really really good. Quinn was a little off, he overplayed his role I thought, but Rooney was not the kid at the swimming pool trying to make dates with sorority girls. After seeing that movie I never thought the same about him. He’s a legitimate noir actor for sure. What the heck is the name of that film? If it’s not considered a noir it should be
Requiem for a Heavyweight (1962):
-
1
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, ElCid said:
Been going through the Tubi "crime" movies categories and found The Big Bluff (1955) starring John Bromfield and Martha Vickers. I watched it because Vickers was in it, Typical B movie from the period. Maybe low B based on production quality. Nothing spectacular, but held my interest.
Vickers is best known to me for her role in The Big Sleep and The Falcon in Mexico. She was once married to Micky Rooney.
I haven't seen The Big Bluff and you know how much I enjoy Martha Vickers. I'll have to catch this one on youtube. Thanks for the tip.
-
1
-
-
25 minutes ago, SansFin said:
Congratulations on your anniversary! I do hope you realize that you will be expected to create a very special celebration next year.
Oh, yes. She is already planning it and assuming things are back to "normal" it will be a major bash with at least 70 people.
-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, Swithin said:
Playwrights edit all the time. Tennessee Williams did it. Oscar Wilde's The Importance of Being Earnest was originally a four-act play, until he cut it (losing at least one character). With films, sometimes you need to shoot more, before you realize what you want to edit.
"sometimes you need to shoot more"? My understanding was that for "A" production films during the studio-era for the vast majority of films the director shot way more footage then "required"; E.g. 3 or more hours of film that ends up being a 90 minute movie. (not including re-takes where the editor might splice multiples takes of one scene into what becomes the final one).
I find the editing process to be one of the fairly hidden treasures of film making.
-
On 8/23/2021 at 9:52 PM, Jillian Atchley said:
@37kitties 😆 YES.
Dyan Cannon and Charles Grodin are two more actors I’ve never really been jazzed about - but I love them in this…I think “I should be CANONIZED.” “Perhaps one drink.” may be my favorite funny moment. But it’s almost impossible to choose!
James Mason drew me to the film. (And, of course, I thought he was perfect. ❤️ I’m not sure anyone could make simply reacting as subtly emotive and entertaining as he did.) I expected to love him - but little did I know I’d find a new favorite!
Have you see the first adaptation of the story: Here Comes Mr. Jordan? This 1941 film stars Robert Montgomery and Evelyn Keyes, with Claude Rains as Mr. Jordan.
James Mason is great in Heaven Can Wait (and many other films), but since you asked your question, Claude Rains does an excellent job in the same role.
There are many differences in the story so it makes both films worth watching.
PS: Cannon was married to Cary Grant but it didn't last long.
-
3
-
-
4 hours ago, ElCid said:
Notice you did not mention Sybill Sheperd's full frontal nudity on the diving board scene. At least I think it was full frontal.
Regardless, my opinion is that TCM does a very good job of showing movies as best they can. The problem is what they are able to obtain and the quality of different "cuts."
TCM is still commercial free in that there are no commercials during the movies.
For many movies more editing in the beginning would be a real help. Not for nudity, language, etc., but simply because the movie is too damn long and therefore too damn boring. TCM does not do that, but the studios sure could. Also, very, very, very few movies should be over 120 minutes and most would be better at 90-100 minutes.
With regards to Shepherd and The Last Picture Show: TCM shows the full scene, right?
Anyhow, if when the other poster used "they" to represent TCM that poster is dead wrong; I.e. TCM does not edit films. They may show a film that has been edited but when that is the case it was an official-edit. I.e. the copywrite owner did the editing.
As for this topic: I see about 3 - 4 different ones related to "cutting scenes". The first one being that when a movie is created it is not about what scenes to "cut" but instead what scenes to include, what take of what scene to include and if a scene should be have parts "cut" from it. I.e. the final product is a result of many, many different "cuts" that are stitched together. (this should be obvious but I get the impression some people think a move starts as some type of whole product and then scenes are altered, cut, changed).
E.g. the same user used The Big Sleep as an example of a film being "cut"; That is incorrect. Instead there was an initial version that Warner's released but only for overseas consumption by US service personal. Warner held on to the film not wishing to release it until the war was over. During this waiting period Bogie and Bacall got married and Warner had Hawks redo a lot of the movie. I view both version as two separate products and both "original" in their own right. (or the war version as a pre-release).
Once a film is release to theaters this because what is know as the "original" release but even here there can be different versions; E.g. different ending for the overseas market. These versions are also each "original" in their own right.
Now we get to were using terms like "cutting" can take place: removing scenes that were part of the original release to theaters. This was done to pre-code films re-released to theater after July 1934 (e.g. Mati Hari being a prime example). It was done when films were shown on T.V. It was tried by Mormons in Utah (but they were sued by the Directors Guild and told to stop their nonsense).
As for Directors-Cuts; I see that some people view these as the "true" version and that the original studio release is the "cut up" version. This is nonsense. A Directors-cut version is just another version.
-
1
-
-
A jingle is offensive?
-
20 minutes ago, Dargo said:
AND not to mention, James Craig is actually GOOD in this one!
Yes, we have discussed this before (which explains the wink to others): James Craig give a good performance. But he wasn't so good towards the Mickey.
-
8 minutes ago, speedracer5 said:
Thank you! My husband and I have known each other since the 10th grade (22 years ago) and have been together for 16. The traditional 10-year gift is apparently aluminum. My mom got us a new 12-pot coffee maker with a built in one-cup Keriug—figuring that was close enough. Lol.
Today (September 7th), is my 24th wedding anniversary. But we really have two: one where we were official married here in the USA in a very small US family setting, and the other on the 21st where we went to Italy and were married in her hometown where I was welcomed like Patton was in the film when he entered Italy. E.g. Many people out on their balconies throwing flowers and filling up the streets outside the 800 year old church.
-
4
-
Where are the silent screenings in Hollywood?
in Silent
Posted
From an educational POV I can see showing a silent films from one of those directors you mention and then a talking picture, as well as showing a silent film and then the talking picture "remake".