JamesJazGuitar
-
Posts
35,217 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
52
Posts posted by JamesJazGuitar
-
-
I agree with you and this is why I enjoy her early work. The fluff she did during the 60s was, well fluff. I also don't like her 'I'm a virgin films' such as Touch of Mink. As much as I love Cary Grant that film just works to death that, I assume, made up part of Day's persona.
-
Well Bogie, who says he was fond of Kate, still made comments about her airs. Bogie related a story about their filming of The African Queen in the heart of Africa. Conditions were not all the great and Bogie made a mocking Kate type voice that she would say 'all is divine!'. He said something to the effect that he loved Kate but she was crazy since clearly all was not divine, but that is just Kate.
As for her acting, to me this 'not one of us' worked well for her in many roles, but she isn't someone like Barbara Stanwyck who is a lot more down to earth and gives the impression in multiple roles of being 'one of us'.
-
I saw one representing all those that passed on in 2011 just a few days ago. I assume they didn't wish to run it before December.
-
Well, I only judge actors based on the actual roles (movies), they were in. Yea, people often say 'well they could of done XYZ, if they were given a chance'. Of course that might be true, but with nothing tangible to judge that POV is just a big black hole to me.
Based on actual performances I just don't see where Joan had anything close to what Olivia did in GWTW (at 23) or Hold Back The Dawn (at 25).
As for liking them both; well I love them both.
-
I disagree with your comment related to so many that are over-rated as it relates to this thread.
To be over-rated one has to be highly rated. Kate is one of the most highly rated actresses there is. We have objective criteria for that; e.g. academy nominations and wins, AFI ranking.
But as we can see from this thread there are very negative feelings about Kate by classic movie fans. I cannot name another actress that would get such a reaction other than Kate (Bette Davis might be a runner up but still a distance second to Kate in the polarizing feelings she creates).
Now I'm a fan of Kate and enjoy many of the movies she was in, but I think those that dislike her make some very sound points related to her acting style and not just her personal life.
-
Note sure what you disagree with. Are you saying that Joan was equal to Olivia in acting ability?
I don't think so; i.e. Olivia was the better actress in my view both early on and latter. Yes, in her early career Joan did well with what she was given, but what she was given was very narrow; i.e. very similar parts.
I don't have much of an opinion on why Joan didn't have a better career after WWII. But her lack of range had something to do with it.
-
Well Mae West would be one of my examples of an actress where I cannot understand what appeal she has to her fans. I don't think she is a good actress and her looks, well all I will say is I don't find anything attractive about her. Thus I cannot see West appealing to either men or women.
But I do understand why Davis and Kate Hepburn would genearlly appeal more to women than men, verses actresses like Lana Turner or Ava Gardner.
-
I think there may be a degree of sexism with regards to how Kate Hepburn and Bette Davis are viewed by some (not anyone specific at CFU of course). But I don't think it relates as much to their looks, but to the fact they were hard, no nonsense type women and that is off putting to some. They want their female stars to be all soft and cuddlely!
I feel Davis took on more roles where she didn't play Bette Davis (e.g. The Corn Is Green, All This and Heaven Too, Now Voyager etc..), than Kate did. But hey, I also think that 30s Bette was cute.
-
I have to agree with you that Olivia was the better actress even in their early (younger) years. The main reason would be that Olivia had range and Joan was a one note pony.
Now I really like Joan and her shy acting style in movies like Rebecca, Jane Eyre and Suspicion, but she didn't do much more than that.
Olivia was also limited because Jack Warner didn't know what he had and Davis got first crack at all the good parts but Olivia was only 23 when she made GWTW. Joan shouldn't feel bad that she couldn't come close to what Olivia did in that movie. Few actreses could of.
-
Well, maybe I'm just being a pain but I couldn't let ' divorce wasn't an option' go by without a comment. Divorce was an option, Tracy just decided it wasn't an option for him. Of course I had a similar discussion on another thread with regards to Rock Hudson. For him they said he had no other option than getting married. In both cases saying there wasn't an option implies that someone didn't have a say in the matter. They both had other options and they both made a choice. Making choices that were not favored by the public, one's church, etc.. would of hurt their careers. I get that. But they had multiple options and they made their choice.
-
You have seen Holiday and don't think it is a well made movie? To me it has a strong message but without being heavy handed, and there are very funny as well as touching moments in the film.
Kate is fairly understated in her role of the sister. I could mention other Kate movies, but I pick Holiday since it is one of my favorite 30's light comedies.
-
I find 31 days less enjoyable since the odds are greater I have already seen a movie that has won an Oscar (often multiple times).
Of course, this is often the case with SUTS, but when the star is someone I'm not familair with (Jean Gabin is an example from last years SUTS), then I get movies I haven't seen before and learn more about a star I lacked knowledge of.
-
I not sure if your reply was to me since I'm the one that used the term 'phony' but I didn't call Kate a homewrecker. Anyhow I agree with you that Tracy was also phony. If you go to the Romantic Comedy forum under 'things I would say to Kate Hepburn' I have many posts related to Kate and Tracy. I laugh when I hear that Tracy was a devoted Catholic because he didn't get a divorce.
We agree 100% about both of them with regards to acting. They are in many of my favorite movies and to me that is what counts way more than what they did off the screen.
-
I assume most voters in The Academy decide their vote for all the awards on the actual performances and NOT the personal lives of the nominees.
We had a similar discussion with regards to Loretta Young because of her out of wedlock child with Gable. Are you saying an academy member should factor in a performer's personal life when deciding who to vote for?
Some called for the academy to take away oscars for those that failed some type of moral test. I just don't understand that POV.
As for Kate; I do question her 'I'm an independent sprit' type of attitude. A true free sprit wouldn't of waited on a married man to find time for her when he could. In this regards I think Kate was somewhat of a phony.
-
Well before that role Hanks played that guy dying of AIDS. So by the time he did Roads he had already stepped out of the light comedy role. So while I agree Roads is a different role for Hanks, Hanks is a good example of what I mentioned below with regards to the craft of acting.
Once someone because a true blue actor there is no concept of 'casting against type' especially in the non studio era. To me the better question is, when an actor like Hanks does break out and do some 'real' acting can he pull it off. Hanks clearly showed he could do more than just light comedy.
-
I have commented multiple times that Kate is the most awarded but also most polarizing actress based on what I have read from classic movie fans here at CFU. This thread just confirms it. While other actresses rub people the wrong way (June Alyson for me), they clearly are not as well known or awarded (recognized by the industry), as Kate.
As for Kate herself; Well I can understand why she rubs people the wrong way. She does act in a similar manner in most of her films and it isn't a very pleasing manner. But Kate is in so many movies that I enjoy; All of her Grant movies, many of those with Tracy, African Queen with Bogart (where her manner fits the role like a T), and others.
So she is listed as one of my top 10 favorite actresses because I determine my favorites based on how much I enjoy the movies they are in.
But again, I do understand why there are classic movie fans that just don't like her.
-
I believe TCM did try to ban an IP address related to 'billy' and I was unable to post related to their attempt because I would get a message that the IP I was usings wasn't allowed. The TCM admin quickly fixed the problem for me. I believe the IP address that I 'pass' to a website is one associated with my ISP and thus if TCM bans this anyone using this ISP (a cable company), would have problems posting (but I might be all wet on this from a technical POV).
-
I also have wondered about that. I guess it all depends on what being jewish means in the context of the movie. If it relates to being from the hebrew tribe than of course Morgan's kids (if he is their bio-father), are at least half hebrew jewish.
If being jewish is just being a member of a religious group then Young could just say 'as of today, I'm not jewish, I'm Christian'. Problem solved, assuming the evil nazis agree with him (and it appear they did since he was accepted by them). But I always wondered why they did accept him based on their misguided view toward Jews. i.e. he was one of 'them' and thus he should of been treated just like his dad.
Looks like another letters of transit discussion brewing!
-
And Fonda pulls it off. It appears some people forget that the craft we are discussing here is ACTING.
That means playing a part. So I don't understand the comments about Frank. Playing against type doesn't have anything to do with one's personal life. Against type means against the type of ROLES that actor has played in the past. The exception to this would be how they look. This was covered with the Tyrone Power or Robert Taylor playing the role of Marty, since the core of Marty was that a fat, ugly guy like that could never find a wife.
But there is no specific 'look' for a priest. Hey, I didn't like Frank as a priest but not because he was known to hang out with gangsters. I just believe the role was beyond his range as an actor.
-
The overall intent of my reply (generally not just to you) was to defend TCM for showing post 1968 movies and why I believe they do this. As you noted the good news is most of the time TCM does show movies from the studio era. When they don't I just turn off the TV and play guitar.
To imply that "preventing illegals from crossing the border" has nothing to do with border security is very strange to me, but I guess I misunderstood that comment and how it related to any of this.
As for the use of terms like 'many' or 'a lot' or other vague terms; Forgive me but I work on medical research and statistical analysis. For example, one might think 10,000 represents 'many' but if it is 10,000 out of 100 million, that isn't many or a lot, but instead a very small percentage of the total. People often use terms like 'many' as a way to support a POV. But often I find these vague terms very misleading, as related in my example.
-
You think Donat in Mr Chips is an example of casting against type? What 'type' was Donat prior to that movie?
I wouldn't view it as an honor, per se, to have the greatest moment for casting against type. But typecasting is often NOT the fault of the actor but instead their studio.
Of course I don't expect every actor to be like Tracy but even John Wayne, someone known for a certain type of role in westerns did some fine work outside of that.
The Astaire choice is a good one because generally Astaire was known as a song and dance man. But I just don't see Donat being any 'type' prior to him playing in Mr Chips.
-
Like many of us do, Pete just redefined his definition of 'old'!
You know; 70 is the new 50!
-
Maybe I'm splitting hairs, but with Borgnine and Marty, I wouldn't say it was a case of miscasting but instead if he had the chops. i.e. if he was a good enough actor to pull of such a role.
He fit the part well (sorry Ernie but you have a mug only a mother would love and that was a key plot element of Marty). So Borgnine clearly fit the role as far as looks. But he was known as a character actor and had mostly played limited parts as a bully bad guy. So to me the question was if he had the chops to pull off a lead role like Marty.
-
Does the latino version of TCM show the same movies as TCM (American studio era films mostly), or latino movies (e.g. Mexican films from the 30 - 60)? I assume the later.
The initial question here related to why TCM now has more post 1968 movies. So while TCM may indeed remain a station, I assume its programming will change to reflect chances in demand. Look at the movies TCM showed late last night. I assume these movies were shown to help bring in a certain segment of the population. This type of programming (showing NON studio era movies), will continue more and more so TCM can maintain its market share (very small to begin witho when compared to other stations). Note that the change in demographics isn't just the increase in latinos but the fact those of us from the baby boomer generation and older will not be around in, say, 20 or so years. Oh, and since you keep bringing up border security; that is the worst way to prevent illegal immigration. Instead fine employers big time for hiring illegal immigrations. That method could be cost netural. Border security isn't.
Yes, we see young people interested in studio era movies here at CFU. But 'many' is a meaningless term from a statistical perspective. The vast majority of young people are not interested in these movies. e.g. for everyone that is, there are at least a 1,000 that would rather watch a current release.
British Seem So Murderous, So Comfortable With Homicide.
in General Discussions
Posted
Well murder is still very rare in Britain when compared to the USA. The USA has one of the highest murder rates for a western nation.
So in film the British could 'play up' murder while here in the USA murder was just as common as going to the store.