Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


1 Follower

About Jlewis

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Good that you clarified that Eleanor was Gil's sister-in-law instead of his sister. I wasn't sure when watching it. Just knew she was "aunt" to the girls.
  2. As always, there is so much to learn about these old shows and their casts and you provided great material here. Interesting situation with Eric Fleming and Clint Eastwood. I do wonder... just wonder since I think about such things... because Eric died so suddenly in 1966, if he did see just how successful his co star was becoming. My guess is that they were pretty much on equal footing at that particular moment in time, career wise. Hard to tell. Those spaghetti westerns were more cult like in their following than they were international blockbusters. In fact, I think the third one did not m
  3. There are a few resemblances. Both are involved in advertising to some degree. Work in the Big Apple and live in the suburbs. Both have secrets in their past that they don't reveal to their wives... namely other wives. Both are war veterans witnessing fellow soldiers getting killed, although Don served in Korea. Tom doesn't change his name and identity though. I think Betty Draper has even more in common with Betsy despite different hair color, both frustrated as housewives and being quite b*tchy.
  4. A great many, but sadly not all, of the Vitaphone shorties have made the DVD cut, thanks to the Warner Archive. A copy may exit somewhere, so it is good that you mentioned it for all eyes to see. Could not find it in UCLA's archive: https://www.cinema.ucla.edu/search/node Vitaphone Project does a lot of research, but their site may be a little old: http://www.picking.com/vitaphone.html Better yet, comment on it on the Vitaphone Project Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/groups/vitaphoneproject/
  5. The British Film Institute has an interesting YouTube video titled After Wolfenden: LGBTIQ+ lives on UK screens that includes your previously mentioned The L-Shaped Room and various TV shows from the late fifties through seventies, if not this specific one. The Play For Today series is fleetingly referenced, however. It could be linked here, but it is easy to find online. Unfortunately, YouTube has that ridiculous age restriction warning on it... which makes absolutely no sense at all since there are no clips of nudity (OK... there is one dimly lit bare behind exposed... big deal) but I think
  6. Although the structure in its editing was occasionally confusing, if also quite innovative and cinematic-ally fascinating as well, there was a wonderful way of "dating" each scene despite it not being chronological. For example, popular music of the US and UK charts is used to good effect: Joan Weber's "Let Me Go Lover!" was a mammoth hit in late 1954, matching scenes when Keith and Viv became a couple. Canadian crooner Paul Anka's "Diana" was also covered during the early years of their marriage with children in 1957. I guess their first car after the big win was, in fact, a 1962 Chevrolet I
  7. I enjoyed this one even though it may require a second viewing later due to the fast dialogue, strong Brit accents and, more importantly, unorthodox story telling. Since it is all done with flashbacks and “flashforwards” (similar to the editing style of both CITIZEN KANE and ABC's landmark TV series LOST), it is a bit confusing to follow. I did like how the scene of Keith's death is shown simultaneous with that moment of jubilation a few years earlier when he discovers they hit it big in the sports lottery jackpot... the greatest high and low in life. Good that you mentioned Viv Nicholson
  8. I have to bring up another remake to compare and contrast here: Peter Jackson's KING KONG. Yes, I know... how dare me! While it is true that it took more liberties with the original source than this film did, it too was built along similar intentions and with Universal again backing it. KING KONG 2005 was lucky in that there was already a "sacrificial lamb" previous: KING KONG 1976 also followed the same story as the 1933 original but substituted the Twin Towers for the Empire State. It was booed by the critics although it did very well at the box office at the time. Therefore, Jackson kn
  9. Pulling this over from the thread on Warner Brothers shorties. It is a fun one to watch, a great parody of a classic feature. The one girl in the picnic scene that I noticed does look like a lot like Bette Davis. Now... if it actually was her, what was she doing in New York making a short when the studio had her busy making features in Burbank/Hollywood? One possibility is that the film incorporates a stock shot lifted from an earlier Bette Davis feature, since it was not uncommon for short films to borrow clips from other features and shorts bankrolled by the same studio to economize.
  10. Not sure if I was looking at the right girl in the clips that I saw, but there are so many familiar faces in many old shorts that anything is possible. This one was filmed in New York instead of California, but that is where many soon-to-be stars worked. As mentioned in the thread for A Shortie Checklist: BFA and Phoenix Films, Bernard Wilets was featuring quite a number of familiar TV and movie performers in his shorts of the 1970s and agreeing to the Screen Actors' Guild to not using screen credits, a rather curious situation at that time. Different than the '30s, of course, but with a simil
  11. Interesting perspective on the first half of the movie which... let's face it... is better than the second despite the wonderful reveal all ending. Don't get me wrong. I absolutely LOVE this movie. I also love THE GRADUATE. I tend to view both movies much the same with their two-part structure that captivates until the Big Midpoint Climax (a.k.a. shower scene here and Elaine Robinson discovering that mommy and Benji are "having an affair") and then it all gets kinda... well, frantic and delirious. Then we get that great ending of endings with a music score to match: Norman in the loo
  12. I finally got to MAN IN THE ATTIC. We can debate which version of THE LODGER is the best. It is certainly on par with the others. My basic problem is that I saw this one last and was starting to get bored with the basic story premise regardless of the changes made here and there. What was most interesting to me was the recycling of certain sets and, while I would have to re-check both films more carefully, it also looked like a few stock-shots of cops in the streets were lifted from the earlier film. Had it been made two years later, I would have mistaken it for an extra long episode of 2
  13. I still have to watch MAN IN THE ATTIC. I have mixed opinions about each of these movies but I did like the cinematography and production details of this one, more so than the story and performances.
  14. I knew you were not typecasting ALL silent films that way but pointing out a tendency you have noticed in many that you have personally viewed. Nonetheless, it did get me into the whole topic of how countries compared and contrasted with each other in that pioneering pre-Talkies period.
  15. I liked this one better than you did, going by what you are hinting in your comments. However I did enjoy the version we will get to next week more and, yes, I was a trifle disappointed that this was not quite as good as its reputation in movie critical print suggests. I think the primary reason why this one tends to get well reviewed is because it was the first of Hitch's "Hitchcockian" efforts. To be perfectly frank, much of his competition in British cinema during the twenties was not all that great. Many in that nation's film industry simply threw in the towel competing with Hollywood
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
  • Create New...