Filmgoddess

Everytime I hear that comment about Tom Hanks being the "new Jimmy Stewart" I figure another angel just ... died. He makes my skin crawl. I watched SAVING PRIVATE RYAN last night and almost wanted to cheer when he died at the end. 2 1/2 hours of watching him pontificate and huff and puff and try to act. Enough already. Two Oscars to Tom Hanks? The same as Tracy? And more than Stewart and Bogart? Oh, c'mon. I guess film acting really has fallen off.

When it comes to sophisticated, older men I'd do Louis Calhern in a minute. He's hot. Jack Carson? I'd throw him out just for what he did to Mildred Pierce.

You said you were 25, right? Perhaps if you were fighting in a war you'd feel differently. Or if you were older.

He gave two great performances in film: THE GODFATHER and ON THE WATERFRONT. I pretty much can't stand the rest of his work. I will never understand his reputation. I can't think of another supposedly "great actor" who gave as many bad performances as he did.

Of course, the CHARIOTS OF FIRE theme is NOT a song, it's a film score. The be all and end all of bad movies songs, for me, are two: That awful clackety clack thing in HIGH NOON. And that dreadful song in the 1997 version of TITANIC. My heart will throw up or whatever it's called. One would make me want to jump overboard and the other would make me shoot Grace Kelly.

Well, Barbara Stanwyck's reputation as one of the pre-eminent actresses of the golden age of film has nothing to do with what her fans on this board think about her. It has to do with many facts not the least of which is that, just shy of 23 years after her death, she is more highly regarded today than at any other point in film history. That's rare. Most actresses reputations decline after their death. They become forgotten. Kay Francis anyone? Loretta Young anyone? Rosalind Russell anyone? Not Barbara Stanwyck. The reason is that her entire career was about one thing: total authenticity. Her performances are completely and totally authentic in every regard. There are very few actresses about whom that could be said. She never gave a bad performance although she appeared in many films, many of them not remotely equal to her talent. She was the favorite actress of many directors not the least of which was Frank Capra and Billy Wilder (and can one imagine two directors more unalike than those two?). She was adored by crews and colleagues for her work ethic which only added to the authenticity of her performances. One can say I don't care much for her or I don't like her as much as you but no one can seriously claim that she ever gave a false performance or was ever miscast in a role. Who else can that be said about? Irene Dunne for sure. But, for some reason, she's not looked at as highly. Who else? Bette Davis? Katharine Hepburn? Joan Crawford? Her 3 main rivals in the golden age. No way. I love all 3 of them for different reasons but I could name 10 films each in which they were miscast and Davis, Crawford, and Hepburn all gave many false performances over the years. Performances that were not remotely believable. Davis got by on shear force of will through close to 10 years of bad performances until BABY JANE came along. Hepburn, wisely, took very few roles and concentrated on a very narrow genre of film but then she did that awful film with John Wayne and some of those 30s stinkers. Crawford was, first and foremost, a star, not an actress. She was certainly capable of great performances but she was always Crawford. She wanted you to know how hard she worked to get where she was. I make these comparisons not to criticize others but to try and explain why, in poll after poll of critics, directors, etc., Stanwyck continues to rank in the top 3 or 4 of the greatest actresses in American film. Then you look at her range and ask yourself, outside of a musical, what genre or type of film couldnt' she do? Westerns, noirs, melodramas, comedy .... and be brilliant everytime. The other issue is the question of time. True art stands the test of time which is another reason why Stanwyck remains so prominent. Watching many of her performances today one is struck by just how fresh and "real" they remain. It's that darned authenticity again. She has stood the test of time. I defy anyone to say she was the "same" in every film. Really? The same in THE LADY EVE and STELLA DALLAS? The same in STRANGE LOVE OF MARTHA IVERS and BITTER TEA OF GENERAL YEN? The same in DOUBLE INDEMNITY and CHRISTMAS IN CONNECTICUT? I don't think so. Those were not "small adjustments" but completely different roles. Frank Capra once described that rare form of acting where the actor completely disappears into the role and there is "no acting at all." He said the two best examples of that were James Stewart and Barbara Stanwcyk. He was completely correct. They may just be the two most complete "cinema personalities" -- to quote James Agee -- of the 20th century.

I'll disagree with you about Barry Sullivan and JEOPARDY. I love that film. It's a perfect 80 minutes or so and don't we all wish they'd make 80 minute films today instead of every movie being 150 minutes long? I'll be the first to say it. Barry Sullivan is a good actor. I'd take him over Marlon Brando (who I can't stand) any day of the week. He was terrific in THE BAD AND THE BEAUTIFUL and dependable in tons of other films. Not everyone can be a great star. Back then with so many movies being made we needed good, dependable leading men like Sullivan and George Brent. On the other hand, Wendell Corey? I'm not sure what we needed him for. In REAR WINDOW, he looks like a piece of wax.

I think that THE MAVERICK QUEEN is okay but I love FORTY GUNS. The song doesn't bother me nearly as much as the constant singing of that awful song in HIGH NOON. Now, that's nauseating. It almost ruins an other wise perfect film. FORTY GUNS is one of the great subversive westerns of the 1950s. No, it's not THE FURIES but, then again, what is? It's Lear in the West. It doesn't get better than that. I hated westerns growing up. They all seemed the same. Then I got older and discovered the Ford and Hawks westerns and then, even later, discovered Samuel Fuller and Anthony Mann. I think the 1950s westerns of James Stewart and Barbara Stanwyck totally changed the genre for me. Sorry to those who don't love FORTY GUNS. Sometimes there are certain films we just "don't get." Afterall, this year the critics are telling me that DJANGO UNCHAINED is one of the best films of the year and I almost wanted to run out of the theater I thought the movie was so AWFUL!

Oh, lord. It's a movie. Fiction, for heaven's sake. And why would Cary and David running off together be an "awful concept?" They're an attractive couple of guys, very appealing, and both have far more sex appeal than that wet boring noodle known as almost Mrs. Clark Gable.

LadyE: I think we posted at the same moment. Larry Kleno is a decent guy who was very good to Barbara so I would feel comfortable with whatever he would say. He has no agenda, he's not looking to gossip. So that gives me some hope. But the hype I read from the publisher continues to give me pause ... it makes it sound like everyone she ever knew cooperated. I know that not to be the case especially since almost everyone associated with her was dead long before the book was published and the problem Wilson had in the beginning is that simply no one would talk with her partially because we all knew it was going to be a "lesbian hit job" kind of book ... perhaps she took another tack. But I do know she never ended up talking to me and quite a few others I know so it does make me wonder how much really valid information she got. Dion? Oh lord. That should be a trip.

I went to the Amazon link that was provided and after reading it I actually had some hope that, perhaps, this is going to be a better project than the one I was acquaintaned with some years ago. Perhaps, perhaps .... but then I read the blurb that the published provided from "Nancy Sinatra Sr." I was flabbergasted. First, it doesn't sound a thing like the way she talks or write. Second, it sounds like it was written by someone in their 20s. Third, Nancy is in her 90s. Fourth, she's been suffering from dementia for a number of years. How did she write such a lucid paragraph about a book she's written that isn't even going to be published for at least another year? Hmmm. Interesting. Inquiring minds wish to know.

And a whole month of wiser film buffs collectively sticking their fingers down their throat at least once per week

It's not a "complaint." It's an observation and I certainly hope TCM doesn't think it has to come with SAG or the Oscars. They are hopelessly bad with this sort of thing. TCM has always been better ... comments are made because some of us wish them to continue along those lines.

Unless someone can point to specifics, I can't think of anyone they left out last year.

Sounds like you need a visit from those spirits that visited Ebenezer Scrooge! Merry Christmas!

Can't agree. The Andy Hardy films are perfect family holiday fare. Esther Williams? Elvis Presley? Loretta Young? They're film masterpieces compared to the trip made by that trio. Happy Christmas!

The classical composer perhaps best known for his film scores died on Christmas Eve. Among his many wonderful film scores is his Oscar-nominated score for Sidney Lumet's classic MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS.

We watched the only two versions we like (can't watch this in color so that eliminates many later versions -- to me, this tale takes place in black and white exclusively) yesterday. The 1938 version produced by MGM starring Reginald Owen and the acclaimed 1951 version starring Alastair Sim. I know the critics dismiss the 1938 as too jolly and too sugar-coated and not authentic enough. I'll grant them that and say that I still love it. It's still the one I remember from when I was a child. It has all those wonderful MGM touches and MGM character players. It's also far less grim and the joyousness at the end is far superior to the 1951 version. Is it authentic? I don't know but this is a case where I don't care. I love it. There's no doubt that the 1951 version is closer to the original story. It is very grim, very very grim. It is also a lot more English than MGM's version. It is a superb film, no doubt. Do I enjoy it? That's a tough one. It's so depressing and scary at times that it depresses me. And I never feel enough of a "pay-off" at the end as I get in the 1938 version. This is one of those cases where I "appreciate" one version for its authenticity and "love" the other version for how much I simply enjoy it. Happy Christmas!

That's funny. No doubt Loretta would fine them for their "blueness."

The great character actor has died at the age of 89. Known for countless films, he might be best known for his role in the classic comedy TOOTSIE. Rest in peace.

Eugenia: I just don't think we are ever going to get that information as much as we want it. Barbara truly saw acting as a job. If you had tried to talk to her about it as an "art form" she would have laughed in your face. That's true of so many of the old-timers. It was a job. It was work. Jimmy Stewart once said "it's not some mysterious religion, it's simply a craft." She gave her all because it's what she was paid to do. That may sound pedestrian but that's how she saw it. Trying to ascribe some deep, dark motive to her work or choice of roles is a psycho-babble exercise that gets one nowhere because Stanwyck didn't see it that way. I understand why we want to know but I don't think there is all that much to know there. She was just very good at what she did. The motivation was work, pure and simple. I think she'd say just let the damn work speak for itself. Although she'd probably not look back on it that much which she rarely did. She wasn't much interested in the past. Happy Christmas! Off to church now .......

I can't think of a more appropriate station to be running the Loretta Young show than METV

I would have paid money or give my left boob to see Loretta Young beaten up by Bette Davis in BABY JANE. You could have sold tickets to that one. Here's hoping there aren't 26 more threads devoted to the sanctimonious one in January when her month arrives (no pun intended)

It's the one month of the year I almost never watch TCM. There's never a film shown that I haven't seen 5 times or that I don't already own. Even August is better!

Nice try, guys, but still doesn't work for me. Both films are basically contemporary crap. Nothing that has Tom Hanks or Keanu Reeves or Madonna belongs in anything sounding like a National Film Registry. There are better films about baseball, women, and matrixes Especially when you consider the classic films they've overlooked.