Dargo

Yeah, well, even maybe worse than THIS is the one Fitzpatrick did on our old hometown of Los Angeles, circa 1940, ya know Moe. Every freakin' time in his little short , he pronounces it as "Los ANGLE-us". And boy I yell ya, that ALWAYS had grated on my ears! (...I wanna tell the guy, "HEY you damn hick! It's pronounced 'Los AN-gel-us', DUDE!") LOL

Nope, not at least according to the following synopsis of this film in the IMDb website anyway, speedy: A woman wanders the streets of Los Angeles in some sort of emotional distress. She is also under some delusion as she approaches many men, strangers who she calls "David." Eventually, an ambulance is called, the attendants who take her to the hospital, where she is eventually placed in the psychiatric ward. Placing her under some medication to help her remember, Dr. Harvey Willard, the psychiatrist on duty, is able to get some semblance of a story out of her over the ensuing days. This phase of her life begins just over a year ago when she, single RN Louise Howell, is employed by wealthy Dean Graham to take care of his chronically ill and largely bedridden wife, Pauline Graham, at their lake house outside of Washington, D.C. Due to her circumstances, Pauline believes that Dean and Louise are having an affair behind her back. Louise can see that Dean does have feelings for her that way in his loneliness. The "David" in question is David Sutton, a civil engineer who lives across the lake from the Grahams, and who has been having a secret affair with Louise. That relationship was meant to be casual, but David tries to break it off with her when he sees that she has fallen in love with him to an obsessional state. Louise begins to manipulate the situation to be in David's life, even if only peripherally. Louise also begins to feel that if she can't have David, nobody else should. Louise is eventually diagnosed with schizophrenia during this time--something she does not mention to anyone in her life--which places her story to Dr. Willard in some context, including what of the story is real and what is all part of her delusion.

Hey, I just remembered here... Nobody's answered my earlier quesiton as to how Joan got to L.A. from D.C. in this flick? Or is it even ever explained? (...and if NOT, how can I be the only one here who thinks it strange that it wasn't ever explained?)

And thus yet ANOTHER reason why these sort'a things should always have one of those (what is that again?...oh yeah, an) "OCD" that in THIS case should've read: "The following short subject film which is presented on TCM as a filler between movies, contains an opinion expressed by one "Old Aunt Jenny" and which was not shared by the majority of other ex-southern slaves at the time of this short being made. And furthermore, for anyone today contemplating a move to the modern South, keep in mind that it gets really really REALLY hot and sticky down that way during the summer months, and so be forewarned about THIS too!"

Well, this DOES pretty much define the concept of "Truth" with the vast majority of people in this world, doesn't it?! (...facts be damned, RIGHT?!)

Ya know, THIS right HERE is the problem with using acronyms when talkin' about stuff anymore! When I saw "OCD" here, I immediately started wondering what the idea of an Obsessive Compulsive Disorder has anything to do with any of this. (...uh-huh, ya see, I'm STILL in a place that whenever I see the acronym "BLM" anywhere, my mind FIRST thinks of the Bureau of Land Management!!!)

Gotta say I'm more than a little surprised that certain regular contributor around here hasn't as yet mentioned a certain movie starring Shirley Booth in this thing?! (...probably just hasn't spotted it yet, huh)

But of course here gentlemen, the question STILL remains: Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio? (...and don't gimme any of this Freudian stuff here, either!)

Actually Bronxie, Van is VERY good in that role, and as I recall might've been the very film that would cement in my mind of what a great actor he was, and after watching this film for the first time probably 30-some years ago. Hell, even Herbert Marshall who made a career out of playing this type, couldn't have done a better job. (... although, I disagree with you that this type of role was "atypical" for Van to play...seems to me he played this type quite often, in fact)

Yep, hence the previously mentioned "great auteur" moniker bestowed upon him. (...btw, didn't know Sellers hated the inclusion of those outtakes...thanks)

Funny (maybe), but while watching Ray in this role, I began wondering the reasons for Joan's old Mildred Pierce co-star Bruce Bennett not gettin' this gig instead? (...and 'cause the equally non-charismatic Bruce would've been perfect for this role too, I thought)

Hey Holden, speakin' o' which... I don't remember. Is it ever explained how Joan got from D.C. to L.A.? What, maybe "Take Greyhound, and Leave the Driving to Us"??? (...although I don't think you're old enough to remember this...the Greyhound thing, that is)

LOL Ya know Bronxie, didn't I also accuse you of maybe suffering from "Rabbititus" the last time you brought this sort'a thing up??? (...but yeah, Montgomery DOES sound like Bugs sometimes, and especially whenever he was attempting to sound like your stereotypical NYC street tough guy...like say in The Lady in the Lake)

Interesting, even with Being There being directed by Hal Ashby and not Sellers? What's the difference? Well, OTHER than Kubrick being considered one of the "great auteur" directors and Ashby not. Still though and my earlier point being that in Dr.Strangelove, Sellers ability to so believeably"stretch" into those these distinctly different roles in that film seems a far greater feat than what I've always felt was a "one-note" performance as the dolt in Being There. (...and in fact, the only thing I've ever admired about his performance in the Ashby film was his ability to not crack himself up in his scenes by playing such a dolt, and which as I recall during its closing credits, shows the outtakes from the film in which he actually does)

So then, what was with your earlier "Zachary Scott --Bugs Bunny" referrence if he neither looked nor sounded like that rascally rabbit? (...if you recall, when you first mentioned the Lloyd/Bugs comparison, I did come around to your way of thinking eventually)

LOL I remember you mentioned years ago this thing about Lloyd Nolan and Bugs Bunny, but I think the Zachary Scott and Bugs thing might be new to me. And as I recall in Nolan's case, it was both his looks and his voice, but in Zac case I'd guess it could only be his voice, right?! (...and 'cause if there ever were a cartoon character from that era that Zac Scott would remind me of LOOKS-wise, it would be one of those "Hollywood Wolves" that Tex Avery made famous, if ya know what I mean!)

Yep, considering she was a few years past the "legal age" (20), and as MissW mentioned earlier in this thread that a spread of 15 years wasn't an uncommon thing in relationships and especially back in the '40s, I agree with you. (...and besides, Geraldine Brooks never came across in this film as "young and naive", either...in fact, maybe even a bit hardened and a bit sophisticated for her age in it, and expecially during that scene in which she meets Van in that nightclub and they begin to partake in a little witty repartee between them)

Interesting takes on what your "turn-offs" are with these guys, Bronxie. Except, I'm a bit confused here as to why in Duryea's case you said his "lantern jaw" (and which I've never felt he had, but prossessed more a longer and thinner face than average) was a turn-off, and yet you made it sound when you said you thought Robert Taylor had "no chin" (never really noticed this either) as also a turn-off for you but then said you still thought he was pretty? In other words, this seems a contradiction to me. (...well anyway, I think I get your point here generally...maybe)

Okay, I suppose I can see your point here regarding Van. Yeah, a decent lookin' fellow he was, I suppose. And btw, I thought his David character WAS "decent", and considering he WAS up front with ol' wacko Joanie from the very beginning, AND could see why he would become extremely frustrated with her over the course of the film. In fact, even when she showed up to see him in the scene where she plugged the poor guy, it seemed to me as if he was attempting to help her AGAIN to understand why they were never a good fit for each other and why "less-charisma-than-a-leafblower"Massey (good one btw, Vautrin) was who she was best suited for. And now that we've gotten this whole "Heflin/attractive" thing settled, would you now like to offer up a suggestion as to that other thing I asked? YOU know, why some women inexplicably fall for the men that they do??? (...you DO know of course that I've been playin' "the Devil's Advocate" here in this regard, don't ya?!...and so, if ya wanna pass on that one, I can fully understand...and besides, this HAS always been a conundrum which the brightest of minds throughout the centuries have never been able to fully explain)

Okay, I'm back, and MissW was absolutely NO help at all here! Nope, just gave me the ol' standard "I always found him pretty attractive" line. (...HEY MissW, I'm lookin' for SPECIFICS here, lady...well, with a general "societal overview" here too, of course!!!) LOL

Hmmm...okay then, but could you perhaps elaborate as to HOW or WHY??? 'Cause like I said up there, I've never been able to figure this out in HIS case, OR like I ALSO said up there, why some women in general fall for the men that they do?!!! (...Yours Inquisitively, Dargo)

Yeah sure Moe, in the case of THIS movie, this factor (Joan bein' a looney toon) might be a major factor in this, BUT once again, what's up with this whole "Van Heflin being irresistably attractive to women" thing in OTHER movies here, dude??? (...wait...I see MissW has just added somethin' in this thread here...maybe SHE'S just explained this all to me here?...be right back)

Btw, I can't WAIT for the ladies around here to now give me explanations to my above stated quandary! Yeeeeah, this should be good. LADIES?!!! (...and no, I'm NOT doin' a Jerry Lewis impression here...I'm calling on ya...let's hear it...I'd REALLY like to know!) LOL

Yep, that's the thing that's also always stuck me about Mr. Heflin and ever since I first became aware of him back in '60s while watching old movies on TV . I'm talking about when he's playing the first male lead in a movie here, anyway. Sure, he was a great actor and usually plays the more intelligent sort of man and usually the more than average "sensitive" sort too (in fact, I'd kind'a classify the guy as sort of an "American version of Leslie Howard" in this regard), but I've ALSO always thought him a rather odd looking man too with his large forehead and very average/everyman sort of features in general. And so, I'm with ya here on this point, Vautrin. (...but hey then again, with you and I being men, have YOU ever been able to figure out what some women ever see in some of the guys they'll fall for?...well, I SURE haven't, anyway...nope, this suuuure can be a real mystery sometimes, CAN'T IT?!!!) LOL

Yeah, not a bad film, but while Stellers pretty much plays the Chauncey Gardner dolt of a character in a one note fashion, he's absolutely brilliant in all three different roles in that one satire about nuclear holocaust, wouldn't ya say Allhallows? (...in other words, how can you NOT love Dr. Strangelove TOO, dude???)