Dargo2

Well stated, and I pretty much agree with you, wouldbe, The only reason I introduced the term "Neo-noir" here was because in today's lexicon that particular term has been coined(yes, maybe needlessly) to describe modern "noir" films made with color film stock.

TopBilled wrote: >True noir will be ambiguous and show that corruption overcomes good, before/during/after a Hollywood production code. Arturo wrote: >True noir did not exist before the production code,or after, but otherwise this is a good point. And now, if you'll permit me Arturo, I'll take slight exception with the "or after" part in your sentence. You see, TB only says "noir" up there in his comment, not "Film Noir" as we think of it. And thus, because the genre of "Neo-noir" would also be encompassed in the general meaning of "noir' films, what with the same general themes and outcomes in Neo-noir films which TB stated above being a predominate theme among them also, AND with the only REAL difference being that modern Neo-noir is primarily filmed in Color for modern audiences, while "Film noir" of the past was most often in B&W...well, the point I'm attempting to make here is "noir" films, such as L.A.Confidential and many others, are still being made to this day,

Yep, you're right, Arturo. Fred SHOULD have been MUCH more cognizant of the changes that have been made regarding the NOW accepted terminology in these matters and in today's world! But tell me...was it STILL okay in this day and age for ME to do my little "eggroll" joke down there???? LOL (...WHICH I might add NOBODY responded to AT ALL!...HRUMPH!!!) LOL again

LOL Good one...and yeah, maybe I DID...just can't remember.

Ya know Sans, I think I'm beginning to see your M.O. around here, and I think it's GENIUS, Lady! Uh huh, fess up now. All that "My speaka da English ain't so good" routine is PERFECT for whenever ya wanna get out o' a minor little scrape 'round here, huh! AND, as an added PLUS, you'll almost always have somebody give ya a compliment and tell ya how really good your English is TOO!!!(and it IS, ya know!) Uh huh...sorry Sweetie, I know your game now! Though if you STILL haven't quite gotten a handle on the American sense o' humor(no superfluous second letter 'u' here, of course), then I ALSO wanna tell ya that I'm just lovingly razzin' ya here, that's all, 'cause I really like ya and enjoy readin' your postings 'round here.

AND what I wanted to add here was that your mentioning of Alan King's many appearances on the "Ed Sullivan Show", reminded me of how Jackie Mason would come to have HIS bookings on that program come to a crashing end. YOU remember, DON'T ya! "Fingah?! Vhat's vith the fingah? Here, I gotta fingah for YOU!" (...sorry, my Yiddish accent isn't all that good sometimes)

Yep, pretty much finance, though I always thought King could occasionally be "snidely" funny. (...emphasis on the word "occasionally" here) (...LOL...coming back to this thread to add another little tidbit about the "Sullivan Show" I saw that my spellchecker changed your moniker to "fianc?" up there...**** here...sorry about that ol' buddy...it's now been changed...to protect the innocent!!!) Edited by: Dargo2 on Jun 10, 2013 3:36 PM

Why Twinkeee, need you even ASK?! Of COURSE I won...I ALWAYS win!!! LOL Yep, it was 1973. I was all of about 21 y/o and was the "Champeen" of one day's game...and lost my "title" the very next show. I think I recall winning something like $550 in total. But the thing I remember most was that the winner of each day's program would walk up to a lineup of 5 cars(Pontiacs in my case) and after you sat in the driver's seat and turned the key and IF it started, it was yours. Of course being that 21 y/o at the time I immediately walked over to the Firebird, hopped into it and turned that key...but nothin'. Turned out that day's car geared to start up was the Pontiac Grand Safari STATION WAGON. And of course, THAT was the car I LEAST wanted to win. Btw Twink...if you're interested, here's a YouTube video of this quiz show(not my appearance, though), which I thought in some manner resembles "Jeopardy", but with the difference that each question had three correct answers. Edited by: Dargo2 on Jun 10, 2013 3:02 PM

For what it's worth, one of my game show appearances(4 in all) was on one that Tom Kennedy hosted titled "Split Second", which ran 1972-75. (...anybody remember it?...the show, NOT me!)

And, I don't believe anyone here has yet mentioned Lance Henriksen as "Bishop", the self-sacrificing android in 1986's Aliens, who bravely assists Ripley in rescuing the little girl Newt from that "B*tch"(as Ripley calls her ) the Alien Queen.

Well Andy, here's one Yank who not only likes a few John Wayne films and most Garfield movies, though of course not all of his have that "happy ending" you're talkin' about here, but yeah, I caught Kapo last night for the first time ever and thought it was excellently directed by Gillo Pontecorvo, and featured some outstanding acting in almost every role, along with cinematography which effectively captures some of the most horrific times in Western "Civilization". Yep, I watched it, and yep, I'm glad I did. I think it should be required viewing for every single person on this planet.

Oh...okay. I suppose I can see your point here now.

Sorry Twink, but I'm not quite gettin' why that little suggestive joke Sepia made below there would make him a "hypocrite"? Ya see, I've never known Sepia to be the prudish sort at all, and so, what gives?

>Seconds: The John Frankenheimer film with Rock Hudson made in the 60's. Oooh! I LIKE this pick of yours here, sfp!!! Yeah, middle-aged John Randolph transformed through extensive plastic surgery into a younger and unrecognizable Rock Hudson! (...okay, okay, I know you people are already WAY ahead o' me here, but read the punchline here anyway, OKAY?!) Ya know I'm thinkin' if they'd go with more of a "women's angle" in the remake, they COULD save a bundle by havin' Cher play BOTH parts!!! (...yeah, yeah, I KNOW...much too easy a joke here, huh...sorry) All (attempted)kidding aside, I DO think Frankenheimer's movie might make a good opportunity to improve upon the original. I remember seeing it for the first time back in the late-60s on the ABC Sunday Night Movie, and remember thinking that while it had a interesting premise, there was just something that it lacked. I don't know, the pacing maybe? Edited by: Dargo2 on Jun 9, 2013 6:42 PM

Thanks for the interesting and informative reply here, wouldbe. Yep, it is a shame that it seems too many American cities demolish some beautiful older buildings in their city core once the land values rise to levels where a quick profit can be made by developers. (...yep, I suppose that that's the flipside of that "enterprising American" trait I was talkin' about earlier, huh)

>I still would like to know what Spade and the Chinese man say to each other at the crime scene. Well James, you're in luck, actually! Ya see, I know a little Mandarin, myself. And, what I THINK I heard that Chinese dude tell Sam was somethin' like...translated very loosely here, mind you... "Woman with sad eyes shoot your friend, and then I tell her if she shoot another guy, she get free eggroll." (...but hey, like I said, I just know "a little" of that language, so I COULD be wrong here!)

Well wouldbe, we Americans CAN be a pretty enterprising lot when we put our collective minds to it, ya know! (...btw, what devastation to the those Floridian cities were you talkin' about here?...I mean, what years were involved?)

Hmmmm...I guess Fred didn't see my parenthetical note at the bottom of my last post down there, huh?! (...funny, and here after all this time around these here parts, I would've thought EVERYBODY knows I do that!) LOL

Roger C. Carmel

I guess I must have missed that earlier post of Fred's then. (..sorry Fred)

>Here is Chapter 2 of the book. http://www.epubbud.com/read.php?g=V6E3QKZJ&tocp=3 It doesn't say that Spade talked to any Chinese guy or any eyewitness Hey Fred, I don't think I would've volunteered this bit of information here if I were you. Ya see, it kinda sorta undercuts your earlier contention that the '31 version is more true to the book, doesn't it?! (...now, don't get mad or think this is an "insult" here, ol' buddy..I'm just pointing this out, ya see, THAT'S all!)

>The 1931 version opens with long overhead shots of what is supposed to be San Francisco. Is it really rather than a movie set or LA? If so it blows me away that this city is so big and beautiful only 25 years past the earthquake of 1906 Hmmmm...no offense here, wouldbe, but I don't know why you'd be "blown away" here about this. Remember the final closing shot in San Francisco filmed just 5 short years later? You remember, it shows a glistening new city risen from the ashes of the '06 quake and fire.

Gotta say James, you're just chalk full of good points around here lately! Nope, I don't think anyone in this thread HAS brought that "Chinese witness" aspect to these films up yet. And, I think it IS a very important thing to consider regarding the differences of these two versions. This COULD be the reason that while Bogart plays his role in more of a serious mode, Cortez has that smirk on his face throughout, which would or might signify that he knows much more of what's going on or what HAS been going on than we are led to believe.

Nah, no insult intended there, Fred. Just pullin' that ol' leg o' yours here, THAT'S all. (...and besides, didn't I say in this thing that I thought the babes in the '31 version WERE a lot hotter than in the '41 version?)

Hey! To each their own, Fred. (...though I STILL say you REALLY only like the older version better 'cause it's shorter AND you have a thing for all those babes in the early talkies!) LOL