JamesJazGuitar

Until I was about 40 I always viewed June Lockhart as a mother figure and not as an attractive woman. When Lassie was on I wasn't into girls yet (they had kooties), so my attention was on the dog. When Lockhart was on Lost in Space, Angela Cartwright was why I watched that show as a 12 year old (one of my first loves). Later on I did see June in classic T.V. Westerns; E.g. Have Gun, Will Travel, where she played a doctor that wasn't accepted by the locals because, well, she was a woman. She was on Wagon Train etc... It was a few years later before I realized she was the daughter of Gene Lockhart and that she was a child actor; Hey, there is June in All That and Heaven Too, Sergeant York, Meet Me in St. Louis etc.. June was a good actor and attractive woman.

What you are calling "complete version 1, complete version 2 etc." I would define as "intact"; I.e. unaltered. Anyhow, another good example is the two The Big Sleep versions; the released-only-overseas-too-US-troops version and the one most people know, the post-war, post Bogie\Bacall getting married version, where Hawks filmed additional scenes, re-filmed others (e.g. two different actresses play Mrs. Eddie Mars), and edited out scenes (one of my gal Martha Vickers!). TCM showed both version back-to-back a few years back. For those that haven't seen the limited-release version, I recommend it. The focus is more on Marlowe and the crimes and less on the Bogie\Bacall romantic angle.

For tapping on Guitar here is Stanley Jordan. My wife heard this and said this was a great duet version, not realizing that this is just one dude, with no overdubs. Using tapping Jordan plays the melody with one hand and the bass\harmonic parts with the other. I play Georgia a lot, so when I told her this is just one guy and before she could say anything, I said: and don't ask me why I don't play it like that!!!

I assume the question here is rhetorical. My POV is that there is no such concept as a "complete" print. Different ones, as you point out with Blade Runner, but it would be folly for anyone to say which one is the "complete" one. I guess one could argue that a version that has all the scenes, intact, as found in every other version, but includes some additional scenes, not shown in any other version, is the most "complete". But I would still never use the term "complete" when discussing different versions.

This from Wiki (initial US release in 1991 was a 143 minute version): A 155-minute extended cut of the film was released on home media in 2009. The extended cut shows in detail the conspirators' plot to steal the throne from King Richard, as well as further exploring the relationship between the Sheriff and Mortianna. In one scene, Mortianna explains that she killed the true George Nottingham as a baby and replaced him with her own infant son, revealing that she is in fact the Sheriff's real mother. Also included are scenes which show Mortianna instructing Nottingham to remove the tongue of John Tordoff's scribe character, forcing him to communicate via chalk-board in subsequent scenes. Nottingham, however, only pretends he removed the Scribe's tongue as the Scribe later provides spoken directions to Robin and Azeem when they pursue the kidnapped Marian

So did you end up watching Top Chef? I did. I wanted the Japanese guy to win. Since I don't know if you did watch it, I won't give away who won. As for Guy and Giada: I agree with you about Guy. E.g. if he was in a contest like Top Chef or his own Tournament of Champions he would be out in the first round or two. But I have seen Giada on Iron Chef and she could hold her own in such completion type cooking. This is unlike most Italians chefs! Generally Italians are not known for their time management skills. My wife, who is Italian, agrees, as well as her mom, and the many Italian chefs we know. Oh, well, the end result is always great.

I don't know if "originally" works because that implies there is such as thing as an "original" version. E.g. the "original" one for US release or the "original" one for release in Britain? I guess that was my overall point; for clarity, when discussing a specific film, it helps if one is very specific as to what version one is talking about. This is especially necessary when discussing films like A Farewell to Arms and many other pre-code films; E.g. what Wiki had: unseen since the original theatrical run in 1932 and long thought to be lost) PS: and how Ben and TCM presented that version of A Farewell to Arms is a good example that TCM does get-it-right (knows what version they are showing and explains that to viewers).

To me saying "as they were intended to be released", is confusing. My example of Mata Hari is why; both the pre-code and post-code versions were released by MGM. I.e. MGM intended to release both versions. The same is true for versions made-for-release overseas versus those versions for US audiences. As for Farewell to Arms; Your memory is sound! Read this: This is the original ending of the film when released to international audiences in 1932. Some prints for American audiences had a happy ending, where Catherine did not die, and some were ambiguous; some theaters were offered a choice.[6] The censors were concerned about more than just the heroine's death.[7][8] Versions proliferated when a much more powerful Motion Picture Production Code got hold of the picture before various re-releases to film and television, not to mention the effects of a change of ownership to Warner Bros. and lapse into the public domain. This is why film critic and Turner Classic Movies host Ben Mankiewicz, after an airing of the original version, summed up the film's history as "confusing." According to TCM.com: " ‘A Farewell to Arms’ originally ran 89 minutes, and was later cut to 78 minutes for a 1938 re-issue. The 89-minute version (unseen since the original theatrical run in 1932 and long thought to be lost) was released on DVD in 1999 by Image Entertainment, mastered from a nitrate print located in the David O. Selznick vaults." [9]

I agree with you here (hey, there is always a first time!); Of course a network like TCM, where their entire focus is movies, should know what version they are leasing. There is only one dependency here; do those that own a film (e.g. a studio, Disney, etc...), know what version(s), they have to lease? One would think they would; E.g. the 1931 Garbo film Mata Hari: There is the initial 1931 released, pre-code version. But the film was re-released after the Production code was enforced in July 1934 and MGM had to cut the film to get it passed by the censors. Therefore there are two "legit" studio released versions. When TCM shows a film like Mata Hari they should know which of these two they have leased!

I just watched The Secret Fury (1950) on MOVIES-TV as part of their Film Noir Thursday. Great cast but only a so-so film. The film features Claudette Colbert, Robert Ryan, and Paul Kelly. It was directed by Mel Ferrer. Mel's bro, Jose is in the film in an uncredited role and actually my favorite scene in the film. This is a back-room type club with a jazz combo. The actor who played Colbert husband (or so we are told), was Dave Barbour; Perry Lee's husband and a fine jazz guitarist. Thus the reason that was my favorite scene. We get to see Dave play a solo on a niffy hollow body, single coil, jazz guitar. I just don't see Colbert being a good fit in such a film, especially with Ryan as her good-guy fiancé.

Big fan of Leslie Caron; A very solid combination of talent, beauty, charm and style. She has a way of pulling at my heart strings more so than any of the other actor\dancers of the golden era of musicals. Films like Lili "work" for me (without getting too sentimental), because of her charm and lightness of being.

I guess it all comes down to how one defines a "celebrity". Take Wheel of Fortune host Pat Sajak; He was a weatherman before Merv Griffin hired him to host the game show. Few weatherman \ weather-host become "celebrities" but some, like Dave Letterman become major celebrities. Your last sentence implies a game show host isn't a celebrity, but I believe that is too narrow of a POV; one may not start out as a celebrity, but a host of a well known (well rated for it's market), long running game show becomes a celebrity. E.g. Sajak and Vanna White are celebrity since they have been on T.V. for decades. (Wiki calls them T.V. personalities). Of course there is no right-wrong take here. I just lean towards a broader view of who is a celebrity than you. As for who should host Jeopardy: I have no idea, and would need to see someone in-action (e.g. host for a few weeks), before I could decide I liked them for the position.

What I wondered about is if MGM had to pay the Lewis Stone's estate for the use of his image in the film Andy Hardy Comes Home. While researching this I found out how Stone died of a heart attack: (Wiki): "He reportedly suffered a heart attack while chasing away some neighborhood kids who were throwing rocks at his garage. Another published report states that on that date Stone and his third wife were watching television when they heard a racket in the back yard. When he investigated, Stone found lawn furniture once again floating in the pool and glimpsed three or perhaps four teenage boys running toward the street. Stone gave chase despite his wife's warning not to exert himself". So did Stone die chasing neighborhood Andy Hardy type kids? Oh, the irony of life. I hadn't seen Andy Hardy Comes Home (I have seen all the others in the series); Interesting that Joey Forman was in the film. I only knew him from Get Smart and his role as Harry Hoo, famous Chinese detective. I never knew Forman and Rooney had such a connection (Wiki): He first attracted attention in Las Vegas as the opening act for Mickey Rooney and also Rooney's straight man. He also co-starred in Mickey Rooney's 1954–1955 NBC sitcom The Mickey Rooney Show: Hey, Mulligan, as Mickey's best friend. Did Buck Henry and others creators of Get Smart get the idea for Harry Hoo from Rooney and Breakfast at Tiffany's.

As a jazz musician and big film noir fan, I have to say that jazz isn't featured as much in noir as "advertised". Most of the music was still the standard orchestra music created by a studio's musical director and most traditional. There are some examples of good jazz in noirs in the 40s (E.g. D.O.A.), but it wasn't until the 50s or so that crime\noir films really started to use jazz music as a plot device and where jazz musicians were hired to create a score just for the film; E.g. The Sweet Smell of Success and even here there is a mix of the standard type of score with an original jazz score: The film score was composed, arranged and conducted by Elmer Bernstein, but the picture also featured jazz themes performed and recorded by the Chico Hamilton Quintet. The music was published and copyrighted through producers Harold Hecht and Burt Lancaster's own music publishing company

I don't know if I would assume Cotton "needed the money". Some people just love to work in their profession. Here is all I could find related to this - a comment from Cotton: "I was in a lot of junk", he admitted later. "I get nervous when I don't work."[

Julie London was in a few crime\noir films in the 50s: The Fat Man (1951) and Crime Against Joe (1956).

Kathleen Crowley; On right now, on ME-TV in Perry Mason!

If you're talking about Norah's ex-boyfriend; Uh, he informed her, thus he is NOT a cad. Again: " they just cheat but never officially break-up with a gal. As you note; he didn't do that.

NBNW is a sound choice but I would still select The Birds. NBNW's plot could be too complex for some and The Birds' plot is so simple anyone can follow it. In fact one could say The Birds really has no plot (other than Birds get angry), and after that first gull attack, most of the followings scenes are action scenes of various ways the birds get angry. In NBNW the mistaken identity alone could fool people; E.g. which guy is the real George Kaplan???? (uh, wake up kid,,,, there is no George Kaplan!!!). The Birds has no macguffins: (well unless one views the entire concept of birds-gone-wild as a macguffin). NBNW has macguffin all over it.

Yes, indeed that is shame. How do these cads sleep at night! As for Norah and Casey Mayo; I don't see that romance going very far. Will Casey really give up chasing the gals now that he has meet Norah? I just don't see it. Mayo won't write Norah a Dear Norah letter. Instead she will read about his latest romance in his column when having her morning coffee. At least she has good gal friends to soften yet another blow to her self esteem.

Uh, of course I was aware of everything you mention here: The show, plot lines, etc... reflect the point in time when the USA had prohibition. I get all that, but I still can't stand the Ness character, and I'll continue to root for some of the bad guys. E.g. John Banner (Sergeant Schult) played a German brew master that had come to the USA. He claimed he was making zero-alcohol beer but of course he wasn't. Here is a basically decent guy, who was a master at a certain age-old craft going back centuries, and all Ness cares about is putting him in prison. I was pulling for Ness to be put into Stalag 13, with Schult as his guard!

The Untouchables is on ME-TV now and I find myself watching it, but only for those character actors and movie stars that I love from the movies of the 30s - 50s. I really can't stand the Eliot Ness character; just too self righteous for my taste. Also since many cases revolve around booze, I find the crusading cops out to stop people from drinking beer and wine to be silly. But as you note: see those high quality actors is a treat. So I watch and root for the bad guys! (who of course never win).

Many men are such cads they just cheat but never officially break-up with a gal. Their POV being: What is gained by writing a Dear Norah letter? (other than one's self respect for being honest).