Dargo2
-
Posts
5,606 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Dargo2
-
-
Well okay then, my friend.
And so in THAT case, I'm NOW wonderin' why ya felt the need to express the OBVIOUS down there then?!
(...eeh, don't bother answerin' that one...I can see right now that this COULD go on FOREVER!!!)
LOL!
-
Now c'mon VX...ya HAVE to admit that that fella Rodgers and that OTHER fella Hammerstein, were real hacks, now don't CHA???!!!
LOL!
-
Well, okay...then allow this smart**** here to elaborate upon what I THINK you're hinting at...
I am supposing that your point besides the obvious differences between the looks of each actress in question here, is that the producers of the remake wanted to "sex up" the role a little more by picking Ms. Ekberg to play it.
(...so, am I CLOSE???...and would you NOW care to elaborate upon my supposition here?)
-
Well, yeah, I wasn't sayin' your observation wasn't true, I was just kinda wonderin' what your point was there....???
'Cause ya see, you didn't elaborate upon it.
I mean, I may be (a) smart(***), but I ain't no mindreader here, ya know!
-
Not sure if I get your point about the dissimilarities between the looks of Anita and Lucy there, krieg???
(...though I gotta say that math prowess of yours is mighty impressive!)
-
Gotta say Jake, there are times I have serious doubts about that statement!
(...though, then again, I think it was ol' Tom himself there, as a matter of fact, who once famously remarked..."People usually get the kind of government they deserve!", huh!)
LOL!!!
-
TopBilled wrote: "As for Lucy, of course she was sexy...Desi found her irresistible when he met her on the RKO lot."
-----
True, but word was, and unfortunately for their marriage, Desi would find a few OTHER sexy little things around the movie lots(and elsewhere) just a little too "irresistible" ALSO!
-
Have to say TB, I pretty much agree with you on many if not nearly all of your observations here, however when you said Lucille Ball wasn't a "sexpot", I'll have to kinda disagree with you about that. I mean, I can't imagine that someone with your wealth of knowledge in cinema history would forget that Lucy actually was considered somewhat of a "sexpot" early on in her career.
Now granted, while she may not even in her younger days been considered as much as a "sexpot" as the Ekberg, and in Ekberg's case an actress who will probably be remembered ONLY for that kind of role, I'd say Lucy would have probably been considered by many a casting directors back in the '30s and early 40s to be able to fit the bill in this regard.
And, while she may not have ever given you that personal feeling of, "Oh Baby! Now SHE'S hot!"(and to tell ya the truth, she never really did THAT for me either), I'd bet there are more than a few folks around here who she did or does make 'em feel that way whenever they see her in one of her early roles.
-
Well, I happened to catch "Pagan Love Song" with Howard Keel and Esther Williams a while back on TCM, and I gotta say the songbook in THAT one sure was forgetable....to say nothin' of the basic storyline.
-
Good to know you're still active in this regard, Graham.
That's also an interesting bit of info about your being related to one of the greats in auto racing.
And yeah, I'll be sure to check-in occasionally to your thread here. From your initial posting here, I'd say it has a very good chance to become another mainstay on these boards.
Cheers!!!
-
Sepiatone wrote: "Sometimes, a weak ending is considered to be those endings that don't tie up loose ends, or leaves the audience with more questions than answers. THOSE are the ones I hate."
Hmmmm...interesting, Sepia. Ya see, I sometimes find THOSE kinds of endings more "intriguingly satisfying" than when all those loose ends ARE tied up. I find those movies are often the very ones I think about for some time after watching them, and often begin to contemplate and conjure up my own ideas as to what might have become of some of the characters after the film is over by using what I've learned of their behavior during the film.
(...but to each his own, I guess)
-
Yep. Good ol' Irwin Allen.
I always wondered if he realized his stuff was total camp or what?!!
-
HEY!!! What the heck happened to my Steve McQueen picture down there???
Well, I suppose you folks can see the resemblance Lansing down there might have had to "The King of Cool", can't ya?!
(...just image Lansing with that mole Steve had on his left cheek)
-
Sorry to hear you've ceased operation of this, Graham. It did indeed sound as if you ran the best and most interesting Hollywood tour in the business, though I'd say a run of 25 years is pretty darn good in anybody's book...especially considering this was a passion of yours, and so having a labor-of-love going for that long IS quite an accomplishmment.
(...so what now?...back to auto racing, perhaps?...oops, sorry...different Graham Hill, huh!) ;-)
-
AND, Lori is gonna REALLY hate me for THIS one, BUT...
John Garfield
...and..
Moe Howard
(...minus the bowl-cut, of course)
-
Robert Lansing
Steve McQueen
-
clore wrote: "Not only did he reap a bonanza from the TV sales, but also from the marketing of toys and lunch boxes. I believe that I read that in 1951 alone, he had made over a million dollars, about three times what he paid for the films."
------------------------------------------------------------
Ahem...sorry clore, but I THINK you're thinkin' of Lorne Greene here, dude!!!
(...geeez...sorry AGAIN, HF...I'm just baaaaad, ain't I?!)
-
So you're sayin' you thought it too "neatly packaged" at the end there, eh Jef?
Yeah, well MAYBE, and though while the following could possibly be attributed to my limited powers here, I think if Lynch didn't kinda sorta do that with this film, then I probably wouldn't have had ANY idea of what that film was supposed to be about!!! ;-)
-
finance wrote: "From being totally bamboozled by Newman and Redord to being devoured by a shark, Shaw really took it."
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, and don't forget what Sean Connery did to the poor guy on board that train in "From Russia With Love" EITHER!
Btw, probably the best and most faithful film production of any of Ian Fleming's novels about his Royal Naval Reserve Commander ever...well, at least maybe until these latest versions starring Daniel Craig, anyway...though THAT'S somewhat debatable, of course.
(...OOOPS!!!...there I go sidetrackin' your thread again here, HF...once again, and in the immortal words of another famous though inept Secret Agent, "Sorry about that, Chief!") ;-)
-
Nope, I don't think you're wrong here, LP. I think you made a VERY valid observation there.
Now, being the "Gearhead" that I am, I'm gonna present this same thought of yours in the context of automobiles here.
Ya see, while the automobile cognoscenti among us might say that there certainly were a lot of a "Classics" being produced some 50 years ago or even longer back than that, many if most MOST of these same folks today would call, say, an extremely modern Bugatti Veyron as an "Instant Classic" also.
(...so how was THAT analogy, huh?!...pretty darn good, huh!) ;-)
-
Yeah...sorry about this, HF. I was kinda thinkin' I was steppin' all over your thread here. My apologies.
And so, to KIND of answer your earlier posed question here, I believe the first time I ever visited the Universal City theme park was right after they installed Bruce the Shark there, and so that would have most likely been in the late '70s and after he devoured Robert Shaw in two gulps.
-
Ooooh..."yule" rue the day you said THIS, finance!!!
(...uh huh...just SEE what Santy puts in YOUR stocking next December, dude!)
-
Sorry finance, but I don't have a definitive answer for ya here either, however, I CAN tell that last movie I went to see at a theater and which had an African-American theme to it was probably "Boyz n the Hood"....and very good movie I think.
(...and I say "I think" 'cause I was only able to hear about half the dialogue in it 'cause for SOME reason there seemed to be a whole lot of folks in the audience shoutin' at the screen while it was bein' shown, and it was kinda hard to hear over 'em!)
LOL!!!
-
Well Arturo, the reason for that may lie in the idea of of L.A.'s version of the "white flight" phenomenon.
I mean, seeing as how more recent immigrant populations and/or "minority" populations of large cities, and in this case that of L.A., tends to congregate near the inner city or as the europeans call it, the "Centrum" of cities, and because freeway systems in most large cities tend to be designed using that location as a focal point with more freeways running through that area, and which will then branch out to suburban locales, then that right there might be why where you grew up it was "surrounded by three freeways and a hill".
Of course, this was just a guess as to where your old neighborhood lay.
(...hey, and SPEAKIN' of "old neighborhood lays"...have you heard from Maria Gonzales lately???...sorry, just couldn't resist that one, amigo!!!) ;-)
Edited by: Dargo2 on Jun 4, 2012 3:33 PM
Back From Eternity
in General Discussions
Posted
Well then, in THAT case, allow me to apologize here...though NOT for "stirrin' up trouble", but FOR missin' what TB said earlier!
Now ya see, IF you just would have "'SPLAINED"(as Ricky Ricardo used to say) THIS to me EARLIER, then all this "unpleasantness" could have been avoided, ol' buddy!!!
ROFL