Jump to content

Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About ChorusGirl

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. "Nice try, though." huh? you were the one who brought up a parallel to being offended by racist material...and asked me if I'd respond with "get over it"...I just took your ball and ran with it. I dont understand what it is you want. Do you just want everything banned, or just edited before it gets to you? Or are you just looking for others to cry with you? Chances of changing european and asian attidtudes toward abusing animals in entertainment are slim. You may want to stick to animation and contemporary American cinema thats been supervised by the Humane Society...you're just going to give yourself an ulcer otherwise.
  2. Hibi...the uproar you speak of was one Asian-American organization, and I seriously doubt it was anything more than one or two activists in a home office, claiming to speak for half the world. I'll let you in a little secret about activism, which i learned in my years in the book publishing industry...all it takes is one person and a fax machine to get something banned. If you claim to speak for millions and write to the right executive, you can get things banned or changed. I saw book covers changed because of ONE complaint letter. Still happens today. Things get cancelled because of nervous executives who are terrified of "uproars" that never actually will happen. Think Disney with SONG OF THE SOUTH. You'll have a tough time ever convincing me that there are more than a handful of people who give a crap about offensive material in old B&W movies on some cable channel. Sorry to steer us so far off topic. Just trying to make the point that it is pretty useless to get worked up about offensive material in old films...NO ONE who buys or watches them wants them censored or banned...and the original filmmakers are likely long dead. So what is the point? It is a tempest about nothing.
  3. Willbefree25, if I was to apply that reasoning to a black viewer** who was offended by racist attitudes in old films, no...I probably wouldn't talk like a sorrority girl and say something like "get over it." But I would say "you are approaching art in the wrong way, and are just cheating yourself if you avoid any art that offends you." You might as well avoid SWING TIME, too. That fox-studded wedding dress Ginger Rogers wears? I assure you those foxes nearly gnawed their own arms off trying to get free from the fur traps. You can ride this slippery slope for a long time...heck, they are eating veal in the GODFATHER. **(and as a footnote, I've never met a single one of these now-legendary black viewers who love classic films but are just outraged at the racial stereotypes and want it all banned. Do they actually exist? Anyone boycott TCM for showing "Coal Black and De Sebben Dwarfs" at the film festival 2 years ago? Or Warner Archive for releasing all the Al Jolson films on DVD. Heard even a peep of controversy? No...I think most people are sophisticated enough to not get all in a dither in 2012 because Stepin Fetchin shuffled across a movie set 75 years ago...not much can be done about it at this point).
  4. I used to get upset about animal cruelty in older films (especially that disturbing scene in RULES OF THE GAME, and most American westerns with all the tripped horses). Just saw THE MACOMBER AFFAIR this past weekend and numerous animals were killed and shown in the throws of painful death, all for "big game hunting" sequences. But...I realized there isnt much I can do about the needless/real animal killing in something 70 years old....its like getting upset about a vintage fur coat from the 40s, or a stuffed lion head from the 19th century, or a piece of antique ivory. Best to focus your energy on contemporary animal cruelty...which you can actually do something about.
  5. "The Busby Berkeley Book", published in 1973 with Berkeley's assistance, makes no mention of the film HAROLD TEEN. (the book is out of print, but easily available online for about $30) There are a lot of Warner/First national pictures with "berkeley-esque" choreography...including BROADWAY HOSTESS, GO INTO YOUR DANCE, READY WILLING & ABLE, etc. I think most were done by Dave Gould...who had a similar style (see Fox's FOLIES BERGERE). He's good, but his numbers lack that magic touch that makes you gasp.
  6. > > Loved just overhearing the conversations going on around me in the theater while waiting for the film to start. And loved seeing huge lines for things like LONESOME, THE BLACK CAT, RAW DEAL...all less well-known classics that quickly sold out. The line for the Cinerama showing of HOW THE WEST WAS WON went around the block...even for standby tickets...warms my heart to see that! > Edited by: ChorusGirl on Apr 17, 2012 3:13 PM
  7. I hadn't heard of this "Universal Rarities" collection. It sounds great...but, as you say, their track record is not the best. They tend to re-release the same stuff over and over again, and then wonder why sales are flat (a Universal exec recently stated that the last Universal Horror DVDs had disappointing sales...could that be because they have re-packaged Frankenstein and Dracula about 45 different times since the birth of VHS? How many more people are going to buy them?) They did give is a pre-code set a few years ago, and some of the franchise sets were good, so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. I'd love if they stared a MOD system like Warner Archive...and let have all the 30s & 40s Paramount titles. Edited by: ChorusGirl on Jan 5, 2012 2:12 AM
  8. Oh dear merciful heavens NO!....your kids saw a woman's breasts?! Keep them away from 1934's TARZAN AND HIS MATE or 1932's THE SIGN OF THE CROSS...let alone all the pre-code movies with women practically falling out of their lingerie. Come to think of it...lets just ban all those movies. Myself, I like to run ahead of the children in museums and put painters tape across the chests of those buxom sluts in those old European paintings. One glimpse of a **** is all it takes...its a one way ticket to the stripper pole and a meth habit.
  9. Love the set design on Fox movies. Just look at the interiors in THE GANGS ALL HERE...there are hues on those walls I dont even have a name for (and I'm an interior designer). I think that adds to the distinct look of their films...I dont think a can of nuetral eggshell paint was ever carried across that 1940s lot. The most spectacular example I've seen of Fox Technicolor is HEAVEN CAN WAIT...if you watch the Criterion DVD on a Blu-ray player the colors are simply astonishing...even THE WIZARD OF OZ never looked this good!
  10. Oh boy, I wondered if I'd ever actually see this one. No VHS release, no laserdisc, no DVD...and (as far as I know of) no TCM showings. Figured it fell behind a shelf in the Fox archive and vanished. Alas...there it is on Christmas Eve! Anyone seen this before? I'm really looking forward to this.
  11. > {quote:title=darkblue wrote:}{quote} > > I guess Schickel takes this stuff REALLY seriously. He gets pretty woeful at the slightest provocation > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ebert's just as bad, if not worse. Roger Ebert is very inconsistent. His movie reviews depend on his mood that day. He'll get all sanctimonious about violence against women and give a movie one star because of it, and then give 4 stars to some hideous foreign film that has a 20 minute graphic rape scene. He has never had any credibility with me...he's sort of the casual movie fan's favorite movie critic. Regarding something being "overrated"....that is more of a reflection on the viewer. It really has nothing to do with the quality of the movie. If a piece of art has been praised for decades, then it probably has merit. If you don't find merit, or you hyped yourself up into impossible expectations, then burden of proof is on you...it is not the art's fault (see the absurd EXORCIST thread on here for an example). The Mona Lisa ends up being a tiny little oil painting surrounded by 6,000 Japanese tourists...so everyone just shrugs, marks it off their bucket list, and moves on. It doesn't mean it's not a masterpiece.
  12. > > > > > > It makes you sound like you are out of your depth with anything but a Bowery Boys movie. > Edited by: ChorusGirl on Oct 13, 2011 4:31 PM Edited by: ChorusGirl on Oct 13, 2011 4:32 PM
  13. > {quote:title=jamesjazzguitar wrote:}{quote}I see the point you are making but I have to disagree with this sentence: > > All of society's deepest fears...thrown right in their faces. > > It wasn't 'all of society' but a segment of society. Yea, a large segment but only a segment. Again, agnostics like me felt the movie was a joke. > > The movie did have a major impact but the people it really impacted where Catholics and those that believe in the concepts outlined in the movie. To other the movie is just camp, and not very good camp. All horror movies have some element of 'campness' but this one was really over the top in my view and thus one of the worst of the genre instead of one of the best. The Exorcist isnt just about the devil. What about everyone's fear that something horrible will happen to their child, and they will be powerless to help them? Jaws isnt just about fear of sharks...its about man losing his dominion over animals, and our fears of nature. Psycho isnt about crazy guys who dress up like their mothers...its the fact that a handsome and seemingly harmless man can conceal an inner, violent evil. Most popular horror movies tap into universal fears that humans have...isolation, powerlessness, violence, death. They force us to face them. I think there are many horror films with no camp value. Though of course camp is in the eye of the beholdre. But where is the camp humor in Last House on the Left? Irreversible? Seven? The Strangers? Repulsion? Funny Games? High Tension? ....All deadly serious horror films.
  14. Oh sweet, dear Fred. As usual with your train of thought...I'm at a loss.
  15. > {quote:title=atlantic101 wrote:}{quote}I do! Even when I watch Arbuckle I think about what he did. "what he did." Thank you for putting your lack of information in a flashing neon sign on not one but TWO posts. As demonstrated in your OP, you don't actually research the things you get worked up about.
© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
  • Create New...