JamesJazGuitar

I recall reading that Wyler was so impressed by Teresa Wright in her debut film The Little Foxes, which Wyler directed, that he expanded her role in Mrs. Miniver, made the following year, thus reducing to almost zero the role of the daughter.

So if TCM showed Gone With the Wind and Leave Her To Heaven, that would be folly?

Welcome to this site. Oh, and most people around here are A-OK. Nice drawing of Cagney also.

Thanks for that info. Never heard of the term "factotums" so I looked it up and it is a great fit for what Doris was. As for Carl; well he comes off as rather meek, so I assume Doris put him to work! I.e. he didn't have a choice about what he would have to do when he wasn't driving Anna around.

Does anyone know why Robert Preston was cast in this film by the British company Exclusive Film? All the other films made around the same time where made in the USA by America production companies\studios, and then there is this British film.

Sunset Boulevard is indeed a first rate noir. I only watched part of it last night since I have seen it many times. I have had multiple discussions at this forum with regards to how much of a cad\jerk was Joe Gillis; It appears that I view him more harshly than most others here. In fact I pointed this out to my wife last night; It was the scene where they are driving in Norma's car and stop at a "pharmacy" and Norma asks (really orders), Joe to get her cigarettes. (I put pharmacy in quotes since that is something else I explained to my wife last night,,, how pharmacies were much different back-in-the day). Joe meets his friend (played by Jack Webb), and his gal (at the time), Betty. Betty tells Joe how she has been trying to get a hold of him because the studio was interested in his story outline\half-baked screenplay. Joe, blows her off saying he is no longer interested. Betty tells him that this impacts here since she wants to be a writer. Joe could care less. This is just another example of where Joe is a selfish cad that only cares about what impacts him. I point this out to my wife but do say: of course that doesn't mean Joe should end up shot in a swimming pool, but when a cad messes around with unstable people, well, that is often what happens in a noir universe.

As for To Catch a Thief verses Notorious as it relates to recommending a Cary Grant film: TCAT is a more "balanced" film in that it has good blend of romance, comedy, action, and a fairly solid plot. Notorious is a more serious film. In addition Grant isn't very likeable in Notorious (in some scenes he is anything but), while Grant is very charming in TCAT. Thus if I was to recommend a Grant film to a gal it wouldn't be Notorious but instead a film where he was more charming and likeable. (but if asked which film was the better film, my opinion is Notorious). I hope this makes sense.

It appears Kate Hepburn didn't see much he those guy either!

We were NOT discussing any editing by the TCM moderators but editing my US - US users of this forum. I assume by "board dudes" you mean the TC moderators. As for "freedom of speech"; again, another misunderstanding - that concept does NOT apply to a website hosted by someone else; I.e. they have a legal right to impose a code of conduct and enforce that. If one doesn't like this code-of-conduct, they can leave. This is settled case law (which is why the Trump lawsuit of Facebook \ Twitter was thrown out of court).

Again, NOT true that one can only edit their own post ONCE. See above where I have: This is the first edit. This is the second edit. EACH of these once done by hitting the 3 dots, and going to "edit", TWO different times. Hey I'll edit it a third time if that will help you understand.

You misunderstood what we are discussing with regards to the "quote" feature. That if the original poster edits their post, and someone "quotes" that post, that the quoted post will also change. That is NOT the case. What you have proven is that if one "quotes" an original post, created by someone else, one can change what was "quoted" - I.e. change the content of the original post in what they "quote". That is a flaw in how the "quote" feature works since it allows others user to change the verbiage of someone else's post. (Like you did by adding those ZZZ to the quote of my original post). Note that my original post remained unchanged. This is the first edit. This is the second edit.

I don't believe that is how the edit\quote feature works, but lets experiment. I.e. edit the above post (e.g. repeat the word "understanding"). This way we can see if that edit applies to both your original post and this one where I "quote" that post. I say this one will NOT change (only the one YOU created and edited).

She was 23. I assumed she just received her 4 year college degree and was looking into a master's program. What I was thinking about last night related to this thread was the future career for both of them: Doctor Prentice was doing a lot of great work in poor countries; I assume much of this worked was funded by Americans via donations. Would those funds dry up due to this "unique" marriage? That would be sad, but given the times I could see that happening. I like thinking all will be most rosy for the two in the future, but the actual reality was likely to be much darker, if not very dark. (and something similar for Poitier in Paris Blues returning to the USA, will life really be better than it was in Paris during the 60?, Dexter Gordon would tell us NO).

I don't recall ever watching Lou Grant either. ME-TV is have a MTM best-of-Lou programming in honor of Asner; Maybe they will add the Entire Lou Grant show to their rotation. I hope they do.

It originally had nothing about Moore (it never said "foreground" trust me on that). Thus one should re-review a post before using the "quote" feature (because one can clearly see that it say "background" when you used "quote" and replied to my post). Anyhow; Yea, it would be great if Eddie featured more Columbia movies on Noir Alley and a few of the better Moore films. Moore wasn't a big star but she did have her time in the spotlight and should be remembered.

My approach when I was single was to try to find a group of 3 women and focus on the second best looking one (if she appealed to me). While it was common for others to focus in on the best looking one, I tried to look at the situation from the perspective of the second best looking one: how often she was ignored because most of the attention was given to her slightly better looking friend. This approach worked and worked well. Often the gal would comment about the situation: "wow, someone paying me some attention for a change!". I would often get a phone number for a follow-up date, while the guys trying to hit on the best looking gal, got nowhere, time after time. I assume I wasn't these gals top-choice in the looks department but from the gal's POV: wouldn't you rather dance and talk with a guy that is interested in you, instead of waiting, hoping the best looking guy that is chatting up your friend, will end up dropping that angle and paying attention to you?

Did you try this without the gun in your mouth?

You could be on to something: Being Hepburn's "bread" would have allowed Tracy to sleep around with other women without reporters and others trying to find out about those affairs since he already had a sexual affair (they were lead to believe), with Hepburn. I.e. both benefited by the deception.

You really believe Hepburn and Tracy were just "pals"? That they never had a sexual relationship? I admit I'm getting my info from Wiki, and that can be a flawed source but according to them: "In Hollywood, however, the intimate nature of the Tracy-Hepburn partnership was an open secret". In addition Tracy had affairs with Young, Bergman and Crawford (that were confirmed by the 3). My understanding of Hepburn was that she was bisexual. As for Ben's comment: I don't think he was trying to provide any "context" but just being snarky as it relates to the myth MGM's PR department used to imply Tracy was a devout Catholic. While I find humor when I hear anyone say Tracy was a devout Catholic, I don't see why a TCM host needs to be snarky about that myth. I.e. my preference is that such comments are not made.

Was Yvonne trying out for the part in Cat People?

Did anyone else notice that after Guess Who's Coming to Dinner Ben mentioned Tracy and how he was a devout Catholic. Ben mocked that, just like I have been doing for years at this forum. Devout Catholic,,,, can't get a divorce,,,, but sleeping with Hepburn,,,, well, can't one still be devout!).

Hey, you misquoted me! Look above; It was Fausterlitz that made that comment about Chevalier (since I always believed Pepe was based one of the Marx brothers).

You see if one looks, one can find redeeming qualities in most people. (of course sometimes it does help to have a magnifying glass!).

Yea, that is the main scene I was referring too. I believe such a film needs this type of silly, slightly out-of-place (based on what has occurred so far), type scene, especially when the final outcome is known by all. How to end these type of romantic films is one of the biggest challenges for screenwriter and directors. In the 30s, the director would just of had David show up at Anna's, they would look into each others eyes and then THE END would show up and the film would be around 75 minutes. But for these 50s "A" productions they needed to go at least over 85 minutes (or so), and Indiscreet clocks in at 100 minutes. So without these silly scenes I might have lost interest with the last quarter of the film.

So did Time Warner make the business decision to no longer make available for lease or sell outright to consumers, all Pepe related content? And was that only in the USA or worldwide? (thanks in advance if you know the answers).