EugeniaH

Thanks for starting this thread, misswonderly. I miss him very much and this board is a lot less entertaining without him. I also think about Kid Dabb every once in a while - such a nice man who started great threads. Over time I was able to catch glimpses of DGF that went beyond his one-liners - I think he would have been a really interesting person to know offline.

Not sure if you still come to the board, Eric, but I had picked up this movie based on your recommendation and I thought it was terrific: well-made, with great acting, and I learned more about that period in history. Hitler is still the epitome of evil, of course, but it was fascinating to see that time from his perspective (as interpreted by the filmmakers).

Per Wikipedia, Russell also won an honorary Oscar (the same night) for inspiring hope in other veterans - the only time in history someone has been awarded twice for the same performance. It was so interesting to read that, so I'm glad I have the chance to add it.

Harold Russell lost both hands due to an accident while serving in WWII. He played on this disability in his role in The Best Years of Our Lives and won an Oscar. Not quite what you are looking for as he wasn't an actor to start, but a great example of overcoming adversity nonetheless.

For the third or fourth time I tried watching Dinner at Eight, but turned it off before the ending. I know it's been mentioned quite a bit on the board over time, and I like all the players in the movie (in other roles), but I find it's just so talky, with nothing about the characters themselves to draw me in. What am I missing here?

One of my favorite Stanwyck/Capra films. These early films of Capra's, like "Ladies of Leisure", etc., were so much better and were free of the heavy-handed messaging he had in his later films.

I just saw them last night paired in "Wife vs. Secretary", with Jean Harlow. Good movie! The plot gets tense toward the end and avoids cliches. Recommended. ?

Definitely. That's only my opinion.

When I was a kid I loved Peter Sellers' "The Party". I loved the Technicolor and loved the silly things Sellers did. When I watch it now (I have tbe DVD), it feels like going back.

I recently picked up this book but unfortunately I couldn't get through it. The writing was flat, though it's hard to believe you could ever get bored reading about Bette Davis. Anyway, Sermak talked at length about how Hyman's book devastated her (Davis).

On another note, if a star in the classic era was found to be gay, that would have caused a major scandal, whereas it's more accepted today.

That's right, I knew they did a Laurel and Hardy skit, but I wasn't sure which ep it was..

I'm a huge fan of both teams. Taking a look at both - 1) While Jackie Gleason was a brilliant actor as Ralph Kramden, fleshing out the character as his own, he was no match for Stan Laurel, who (in addition to acting) also thought up gags, helped construct scripts, and was very much the force behind what made L&H work as a team. You may not appreciate the L&H style of comedy, but you have to respect all that Stan did to make their stuff come alive. 2) Again, I could probably recite scripts from the Honeymooners' "Classic 39" from memory, but their repertoire was more limited. The themes revolved around Ralph's crazy harebrained schemes, sewer jokes, the Raccoon Lodge, etc. etc. Even the supporting players were the same, changing roles from week to week. L&H had set "personalities", but their shorts were a lot broader in terms of range of topics. Also, sometimes you were able to see some musical interludes, like Oliver Hardy singing (in "Pardon Us"), which didn't exist in The Honeymooners (though a much later format of this show had singing and dancing) 3) I like what Sepiatone said in his post: "It was the TIMES both existed in that made their comedy work. I don't think L&H's comedy would work in Ralph and Ed's time, nor would it be possible in modern times, as the whole country's situation is vastly different then it was in the '20's and '30's. And even Ralph and Ed's early '50's world was that different."

In a related battle, Flynn was a better actor but Gable was sexier. ?

I don't have a lot of blu-rays in my collection, but I find the improved quality is more noticeable with color films, vs. black and white. Others may disagree. I would replace my current DVDs with blu-rays if those movies had exceptional cinematography, where it would enhance the feeling of being "drawn in".