Dargo2

>Aside from anything else, this suggests to me that Joan and her daughter are not very close, do not know how to talk openly to each other. In fact the whole family seems a little cold and dysfunctional that way. Well, maybe that's 'cause they might've lived apart for a few years, MissW. Uh huh, Joan in Balboa California with the rest of her family...and her daughter in NYC! I mean what OTHER conclusion CAN you come to what with Geraldine Brooks' thick New York City accent in this movie, HUH?! LOL Okay, all kidding aside, yeah, I suppose your point about the family being "dysfunctional" might hold a LITTLE water anyway, but I think the real cause of this feeling is the reasonably fast pace of this piece, and so maybe the decision was made to not slow it down by introducing a more complex relationship between the mother and the daughter after the death of the original antagonist. AND, don't forget there was that short scene near the end of the movie where her Father-in-law seems to suspect somethin' and asks her if she wants to talk about what's on her mind.

Yep Sans. I suppose that's a "couple of good points" there, alright! (...hey, don't blame ME here...I DIDN'T start this baby in this direction, REMEMBER?!)

>The true negotiated settlement: Everybody gets a little something of what they wanted, and no one is thoroughly happy about it. Hmmm...better watch talkin' like this, Char. (...I mean, ya never know...you MIGHT entice somebody around here now to start filibustering in this thread and so that this very reasoned thought goes nowhere!!!) LOL

> I may be an archivist, but I'm not a masochist. YEAH?! Well then Andy, PLEASE explain that picture of you sportin' that dog collar while on all fours that's been floatin' around the Internet if ya would?!!! (...sorry...you know I can't resist these sorta set-ups around here, doncha?!)

Oh, okay, I think I see the reasons for your thought here now. However, I have to say that that whole "uncomfortable" feeling you get from him is pretty much the reason I personally always found his acting, let us say, "intriguing".

I'm glad you brought this up here, finance. You see, I'm thinkin' here that the possible reason you made the comment that you did about Mason being miscast in The Reckless Moment (or at least words to that effect...or is that "affect"..but I digress) is that when his name is mentioned you MIGHT primarily think of him during his middle aged years such as during his turn as the lecherous Prof. Humbert, and maybe tend not to at first think of him or his work during his younger years and when he was a perfect fit for his role in this film. (...just a theory here, you understand)

LOL Well, just be ready for the amount of their "dues" over there, ol' buddy! (...and word is their shop stewards aren't exactly the sharpest tools in the drawer EITHER, ya know!)

Well, that of course always depended upon one's seniority, and if they had enough to hold Saturdays and Sundays as their "weekend", OR even if they wanted to have those days as their "weekend" IF their seniority permitted it. (...for instance in MY case, I used to prefer having Sunday and Monday off if I could get it with my seniority after my workforce would bid on their shifts every 6 months)

Yeah, I thought I'd start my weekend early! (...though as I said earlier, because I'm now retired, I suppose it bein' a weekend or NOT really isn't that much of an issue, huh!) LOL

>Why not a list of Production Divorces ? Very simple, my dear. Remember, these productions are most often filmed in Hollywood, and thus if they would do THAT, the credits would roll for ANOTHER 30 freakin' minutes!!!

>Now I can tell you with some authority that many of those people in the credits do not have union representation. Sooooo. does this mean the poor saps can't occasionally tell their bosses how clueless they think they are and STILL keep their jobs, Char???? LOL (...btw, and JUST for the record here...I ALSO have no problem sittin' through the credits, and really don't see a problem here...'cause I have the feelin' that the REAL reason the price of movie tickets keeps risin' is 'cause A-List actors today are askin' for AND receivin' salaries that are not commensurable with their talent...'cause if you ask ME, most of 'em SHOULD be makin' about 40 bucks an hour TOPS!!!) Edited by: Dargo2 on Jul 13, 2013 7:43 AM

Yeah, kinda sorta, I guess. LOL (..but HEY, after all this time around HERE, and with you seein' how I usually don't take any "you-know-what" from some of the more, let us say, "pretentious" people around HERE who occasionally act like those old managers of mine, then WHY should THIS be so surprising to you, HUH???!!!) **** some more here now!!!

AND, there is at least one MORE positive aspect to union membership which you didn't mention here Char, and here it is... Well, at least in the case of THIS old union member HERE away, and THAT would be all those times I would walk into my various Managers' offices over the years and read THEM "the riot act" about what lame managers they were, and especially after they would make one ultimately to be proved later counterproductive business decision after another. WHICH during these "riot acts" I'd deliver to them WOULD explain in detail why their decisions would be an utter failure and counterproductive measures. Uh huh, and I'd VERY often tell them during these little "riot acts" that classic ol' refrain, "LOOK Sir(or Ma'am as the case may be) just remember ONE thing here. As a Supervisor with this airline for over 20 years now and who has preformed almost EVERY function with this airline but fly the damn airplanes, I have probably FORGOTTEN more about the airline biz than YOU will probably ever even LEARN!" Uh huh..I did THAT more than once during my airlines "career". AND of course, the reason I brought THIS aspect up about "union membership" was that I COULD walk into their offices and DO that, and those freakin' lamebrains could NOT fire me for saying that sort of stuff to them AS LONG as I continued to my job as well as I did. Uh huh..."personal/office politics", i.e.,"if the boss liked me or not" had absolutely NO bearing upon my continued employment! And thus, ultimately allowing me to retire at age 55, some 6 years ago, with a reduced pension and so I would NEVER have to be in close proximity to any more of those incompetent "Managers" ever again...AND while receiving said pension check once a month! (...yep, life is SO much better now!!!) **** here

Thank you, Lavender. Yep, I have to say after I watched Mason's performance in The Man Between on TCM a few years ago(and btw, a film which seems to be one of those forgotten gems of the cinema), I became an even bigger fan of his work.

Sorry, but you two are SO off-base about Mason being "wrong for the part". Ya see, as I said near the beginning of this thread, James Mason had the ability to play characters that were extremely flawed and often extremely underhanded, but you still end up rooting for them. What you two need to do is watch just these two of his films in which he's excellent at doing just that: Odd Man Out (1947) ...and... The Man Between (1953...and especially THIS one in which he's sort of a Harry Lime character in "The Third Man" in post-war Europe) ...and then afterward tell me again "he was all wrong for the part"! (...'cause I don't think you could and still hold a straight face!) Edited by: Dargo2 on Jul 12, 2013 3:15 PM Edited by: Dargo2 on Jul 12, 2013 3:20 PM

>About remaking TGOW, are there any Gregg Tolands alive in Hollywood today? Someone name them because I can't. Who do you use if your Spielberg? Vilmos Zsigmond? Well, here's what someone or a group of someones thinks about this over at IMDb, anyway: http://www.imdb.com/list/aTyn8OMkytQ/

Oh, so YOU were the "culprit", eh Twink?!!! And here all along I thought it was the guy who evidently has me on his "ignore" function now because he evidently feels "insulted" when I disagree with his opinions and when I ask him to expands upon his thoughts by giving me his reasoning for them. LOL (...well, in either case, it's not that I mind "a good sidetracking" to a thread as I'm sure you know , but I think you now may understand why all this talk of 'Kane" and "Toland" and "revolutionary films" is not really pertinent to this discussion here)

>Yes, I already knew much of KANE was revalutionary in terms of film making. Close focus, ceiling shots, low light cinematography. The fact that Toland had to practically INVENT half of the stuff he used is fascinating in itself! Yes, I knew you'd know this Sepia, however the primary point I was attempting to make in my first response to you was more the part I'll will now place in bold letters... Actually Sepia, the whole cinematography in "Kane" was revolutionary, and thus probably the very reason why the argument COULD be made that to remake THIS film would be a very questionable endeavor to undertake for ANY latter day director, because while the story of ANY man told in flashback format has been successfully done many times since, the story of one Charles Foster Kane will ALWAYS be associated with how revolutionary the camera work was of Gregg Toland's. And then, I probably should have then gone on to make THIS following point here...and THAT point would be that all this talk of Citizen Kane had been brought into THIS discussion about the remaking The Grapes of Wrath in some people's efforts to correlate why a remake of "TGOW' should not be done because in THEIR words "both films should be considered sacrosanct from doing so". However, MY point is that one can NOT use these two films in this manner to prove that point because 'Kane" IS pretty much the "benchmark" to which all films are compared because of this very "revolutionary" aspect of it, and whereas Ford's version of "TGOW" IS a very well done piece, it will NEVER be considered "revolutionary" OR be placed as "THE best film ever made" by most film historians and critics as has "Kane", or EVEN within the top five or ten or even twenty "best films" ever made. And thus my ULTIMATE point here is that all this talk about Citizen Kane in THIS thread has been as "off-topic" AND irrelevant to the original topic as ANY interjected attempt at humor that I or you or finance or any other of us jokers around here have EVER interjected into ANY thread!

Btw Char, I thought that BBC link you provided was a very interesting read, and so thank you for posting it.

Yes Fred, I'm sure it does. "The Onion" is most noted for doing the very same kind of "pointed humor" as Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert are noted for, aka satire. And in THIS case the satire such as theirs of the retro-thinking population in this country. (...though I hope you can see this response, as I'm getting the impression lately that you "don't care" to read any of my opinions which may run counter to yours, and thus am starting to believe you have very unwisely placed me on your "Ignore" function in order to spare yourself of my very thought-provoking BUT often pointedly humorous replies to you and to others, and such as the aforementioned Messrs Stewart and Colbert are noted for, and WHICH of course is CERTAINLY your prerogative to do so, BUT as I said I feel would be a very unwise move on your part to do so, 'cause THEN you'd be missin' out on those occasions where I actually glean and supply a little bit of insight into an issue that no one else might have previously thought of)

Agreed on all counts, James. (...so, does this make THREE 6-packs I should be buyin' now, dude?!)

Orco, I'm so glad you bumped this back to Page 1 of this forum with your thank you to Tom, or else there would have been the possibility of me missing this completely. And so now that I've discovered your thread, I too am now looking forward to perusing your father's website and these interviews he conducted. Cheers!

Dargo like Argo...nauts. But Dargo 'specially like Nancy Kovack...she one hot babe! (...and Dargo have crush on Nancy since he first see movie in 1963 and when Dargo was 11 y/o small fry)

Nah, I'm sure it wasn't, mn. I just couldn't resist playing off Dr. Kimble's picture of Veronica there, that's all.

And thus ALSO explaining why you never would again see her during WWII at the Douglas Aircraft Plant in Downey CA, but INSTEAD until the duration of the war would spend her off-hours away from the Paramount Studios playing her harmonica down on the pier at Santa Monica! To get this one, it helps if you're a fan of the old Dr.Demento radio show.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvAhaq7nDlE