Jump to content

 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

AddisonDeWitless

Members
  • Content Count

    1,672
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Everything posted by AddisonDeWitless

  1. to me, the role that proves what a good actor Duryea was is *The Little Foxes.* He is so spineless, weak and stupid in that film, it's really hard to believe it's the same guy who later did Scarlet Street. ps- I'll always remember Muller describing Duryea as "one of the first actors to ever act with his hair"- which he meant as a compliment, and it's true.
  2. > {quote:title=twinkeee wrote:}{quote}I think she has a slight "Una Merkel" sound to her voice.. > > I thought she had a slight,... "I went to 'Sarah Lawrence College' !..so there!!! " > > ... sound to her voice. > > Twink NICE! ps- as for RO's interviewing skills, I agree. He's still got it, and "it" is not an easy thing to have. If you want to see someone *utterly fumble* an interview, just watch Manksie-Boo-Boo interrupt whoever he's talking to 100 times and then follow up with an utterly inane question. He did a particularly lousy interview with Fred MacMurray's daughter during the classic film festival where I swear he didn't let her finish a single sentence.
  3. Yeah, there were quite a few times where it seemed like he and Molly chafed one another when doing The Essentials, but I enjoyed seeing him step out of his "magnanamous professor" role to tell us what he really thinks. I remember he and Baldwin clashed over Cat People, which I get. (RO loves it, Baldwin didn't. It was maybe the only time where I was on Baldy's side.) Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jun 13, 2013 10:33 AM
  4. Look, just the fact alone that R.O. manages to not periodically reach over to Drew and "thump the melon" in search of a brain is enough evidence of his patience and restraint. (not to even mention that he can still manage to fake enthusiasm over watching Lawrence of Arabia one more effin' time.)
  5. I just *really wish* The Burglar and Shoot the Piano Player were on in the 8:00 and 10:00 slots instead of the okay, but often shown (and debateably not a film noir ) Dark Passage and the so-so Nightfall. ps- I have a real passion for pulp novels, but I was surprised when- a year or so ago- I finally got around to reading Shoot the Piano Player. *HATED it.* Dropped it about twenty pages before the ending and didn't even bother to skip to the last page (and what more damning critique of a thriller is there than that?) pss- Also tried reading Dark Passage, but it is SO LIKE the movie, there really wasn't any point.
  6. *I KNOW RIGHT!!!???* (I've always said Boor-zaag.) ps- from me time in HOLLYWOOD, I actually learned a lot of big-time players like to pronounce their names in a totally different manner from how you'd think- that way they can have "their people" weed out the fakers on the phone. There was one agent at ICM named "Risa Shapiro" and it's pronounced "RYE-suh Shuh-pie-roh."
  7. Boom. There you go. Every single line of that paragraph you just wrote was more inn-teresting than all of what Haskell had to offer (that I saw) last night. ps- Ruth Chatterton got her own SUTS day somewhere in the past, no? If not, *she deserves one.*
  8. This seems as good a point as any to point out that *Friday the 14th's* Spotlight is dedicated to *David Goodis* with the oft-shown Dark Passage and Nightfall airing at 8:00 and 10:00 pm respectively, and *the far less shown* The Burglar (1956- with Jayne Mansfield!!!) and Shoot the Piano Player (1960) airing in (naturally) Ye Early Morning Graveyarde Shift. Sigh.
  9. Trust me, there's nothing wrong with the fact that you can't. It's a southern "talent"- yew gots to be born down here. Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jun 12, 2013 4:47 PM
  10. Now you've made me want to see Satan Met a Lady. ps- if anyone's looking for a pretty decent (as I recall and I saw it 27 years ago so I could be wrong in my recollection) spoof of Falcon, The Black Bird with (I believe) The King Rat himself, George Segal is (again as I remember) a very funny film. I remember in one scene, "Spade's" dead partner's wife shows up at his office drunk as a skunk and spills her dead husbands ashes down the toilet. You remember something like that for life when you see it as a seven year old. Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jun 12, 2013 4:44 PM
  11. Well, I'm from North Carolina (as is Haskell) so, you know, I've built up a tolerance to the accent. ps- her "Raaaaalph!!!" would be prounounced "Raaaah-aye-lph!!!!!!!!!!" We North Carolinians are big on loading a word with as many syllables as possible.
  12. Also also, to continue whacking the dead horse, *I didn't like it* when Molly Haskell dismissed Ruth Chatterton as a " largely forgotten name" (that part is true) whose career *"spanned mostly the silent era."* *Um: no.* Chatterton made her first film in *1928,* in what (I think) is her *only silent* film (and it even had sound effects.) She was double-nominated for the 1929-30 Best Actress award for two performances in talking pictures Sarah and Son and Madame X. She went on to appear in *twenty (or so) more talking pictures,* among them Frisco Jenny, The Crash, Lily Turner and the well-regarded Dodsworth, which I personally find to be really boring, but in which Chatterton's performance is easily the best and boldest of the picture which actually makes a fascinating companion piece to Female for numerous reasons (neither Os nor Haskell brought this fact up though.) (A double feature of Female followed by Dodsworth would be neat.) I know I make errors a lot in my posts, and some may even be in this one, but it kind of eats at me a little bit when these film "experts" *go on the network and across the airwaves* to introduce these films and then give glib poorly researched and/or incorrect background info. It just ain't right. Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jun 12, 2013 2:21 PM
  13. > {quote:title=clore wrote:}{quote} > > I thought that Molly Haskell came off better last night than she did in her former appearances > Agreed. I know some people here are hard on Haskell, oddly enough faw huh accent, which to me is her most redeeming quality. However, what experience I've had of watching her on TCM or her commentaries on DVDs, she does have a tendency to sometimes seize on inconsequential aspects of films (Stanwyck's hair in BabyFace for example) and make kind of trivial, not too deep comments on them when there are larger issues about said films that could be discussed (her comments on the DVD special feature of Possessed (1947) also come to mind.) All in all, I'm okay with her, but for someone with such an alleged knowledge of filmdom, I kind of wish each time she was on the Network that she'd think a little more outside "The Box" when it comes to selecting titles we *all* haven't heard of/ seen ten thousand times already. ( but I'll take her over Rex Reed, Maltin and the weekend guy any damn day or night.) ps- I do think she was referring to Brent's offscreen relations with Davis, as Osborne agreed "he seemed to be attracted to strong women"- but sallright. To me, the moment came off as an unintential burn, with all points going to Os. Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jun 12, 2013 11:30 AM
  14. Umpteenth and one, but I'll watch Babyface every single time it airs, no matter what, and I've fallen asleep every other time Female has aired, so it was good to finally catch all of it. ps- she also mentioned both versions of Babyface are on *NETFLIX!!!!!!* OMG- she said the "N" word on TCM and in prime time!!!!!!!!
  15. > {quote:title=Dargo2 wrote:}{quote} > > (...I mean, don't ya think The Mankster's seniority at this point should allow him at least the OCCASIONAL weekend off???) > Oh, more than occasional. So much more. Oh, and... did anyone see Osborne *SCHOOL MOLLY HASKELL HARD LAST NIGHT* when she was (awkwardly) introducing Female. He knew Chatterton and George Brent were married at the time (she didn't), and were divorced a year after making it (again, she didn't.) She then tried to save face by asking "oh, but this was befaw his Bettay Dayvis period, rahht?" which *even some of us novices know* didn't start until the late 1930's/early forties. Don't write The Os off just yet, as he took "one of the foremost experts in classic film" (yeah right) down and wasn't even trying. ps- why was Molly Haskell asked to introduce films with strong female roles when Cher did the same thing a month ago *and half the films she picked were ones Cher had introduced?* And the other half, Female and Babyface have both been shown together in prime time on (what seems at least) like a couple of other occasions? And then she didn't point out *one single inn-teresting fact about either of them?* Yawn. Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jun 12, 2013 9:56 AM
  16. Yeah, I caught the "Chain/Chained" slip-up too, although it's entirely possible we just heard wrong- the words kindasorta sound the same.But yeah, it sounded like "Chained" coming from Os, the Great and Powerful. Either way, it was a pretty forgettable movie and I'll cut the silver fox some slack on this one. I think Ole' Girl just wants to hang on as long as she can 'cause there's not a worthy successor to the throne (besides maybe Ileanna.)
  17. > {quote:title=finance wrote:}{quote}Sylvia is an EXTREMELY ugly name. My apologies to all the Sylvias out there. "Sidney" doesn't score any points either. If an actress came to Hollywood today with the real name "Sylvia Sidney", *the studio* would change it so quickly that she wouldn't know what hit her. Just an FYI (which you may already know) "Sylvia" comes from "Sylvan" meaning of or related to the forest- ie. a "sylvan glen" or "Transylvania"- meaning "the land through the forest." And "the studios" (such as they are these days) don't sign new talent (or much talent period) these days to contracts- that's loooong gone. She'd have to get on with an agency- who probably wouldn't even touch her unless she came with some credits to her name already or was signed with someone else or was sleeping with/related to someone really important (sadly, C is the most likely option.) And by the time she signed with whomever, she'd've been hit with so many things (metaphorical and literal) that, I do think- yeah- hopefully she'd be impervious to it by that stage of "the game." Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jun 11, 2013 5:37 PM Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jun 11, 2013 5:39 PM
  18. > {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote} > > (Which also brings me to the point that someone here said something about that name, and how someone "didn't get it". Get what? Is there some word play or other "take" on the name "Brigid O'Shaughnessy" that I've not picked up on? Do I even want to know?) > It's possible you're recalling something I wrote a few pages (or so) back about how the name "Brigid O'Shaughnessy" never comes up in the 1931 version, she's strictly "Ruth Wonderly." I speculated maybe the filmmakers did that because they thought the audience wouldn't "get it"- ie the rapidly changing names and backstories of the character, when it's actually one of the hallmark details in the movie and sets the tone wonderfully. (It's even later parodied in other versions of detective stories.) It was another example of how the 1931 version doesn't put the same amount of faith in the intelligence of the viewer as the 1941 version does.
  19. > {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote} > > Call me naive, call me idealistic, call me a cab. > Ba-boom: there. *There's your new screenname* (if you want or ever need it, although I personally like "Miss Wonderly" and think it suits you so well.) ps- I can totally see why you'd rather be A. Cab than "Ruth." Ick. It's worse than Iva. pss- Iva? Iva? What the hell kind of a name is Iva? I feel like Bugs Bunny repeating "Hahnsel" to myself all day. Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jun 10, 2013 11:06 AM
  20. Just looked it up. *It is Iva.* What a horrible name. I mean, Ida is bad, but "Iva"- what the hell?
  21. Der Finale to Die Miestersinger is also featured in the symphony scene of Dracula, 1931. COINCIDENCE?! ( probably )
  22. > > {quote:title=jamesjazzguitar wrote:}{quote}the role of Iva is done a lot better by Thelma Todd than Gladys George. This is an area of the Huston version that doesn't work for me. A key part of the plot is that Spade is having an affair with his partner's wife. The way George plays Iva one cannot believe Spade would want to be with a women like that. Huston also has Spade mock Iva making his dislike for her clear to see. That isn't realistic. Being tired of the relationship as seen in the 31 version makes sense. Being disgusted with her doesn't. > > > > Again, one cannot place all the fault on the Code for the above. > > {quote:title=NoraCharles1934 wrote: }{quote}You do sort of have to wonder why Bogart's Spade would've been messing around with Mrs. Archer. Gladys George is certainly not unattractive, but her Iva is so clingy and grating. I think sleeping with his partner's wife has more to do with fulfilling the whole world-weary PI persona than animal lust. > > Very good points both, although I thought it was "Ida." Anyhoo, I wouldn't fault Gladys George for the fact that her character is the one thing about the 1941 Falcon that doesn't entirely "work"- and is maybe is a tad superfluous in retrospect. Jadore Gladys George. She was a silent star who faded, then was in a surprise hit for which she was Oscar-nominated for Best Actress in 1936. She went to Warners after that and they largely didn't use her properly or enough, either miscasting her or putting her in small roles. She's sensational in The Roaring Twenties, Flamingo Road, The Crystal Ball (a loan-out, I think) and she gives (maybe) the best performance in The Hard Way as an egomaniacal, drunken showbiz hag dropping to earth like a comet. She's given third billing in Falcon and an unsuitable role more appropriate for a young up and comer (remember Spade's partner is much younger in the 1941 version). George would've been better in the part in 1931. I think it was likely a contractual thing that she found herself assigned to Falcon and I think she makes the most out of a role that is so small and not entirely tangential to the rest of the plot. The relationship between Ida(?) and Spade in 1941 is the one part of the film where Spade is undeniably a heel- although Bogart handles it so as to not make him an utterly loathsome heel; whereas in the 1931 version it was merely a side-dish on Spade's veritable buffet of loathsome, icky behavior. ps- it's possible I'm wrong about the Ida thing and various deets on the career of Miss George. Apologies. Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jun 9, 2013 10:34 AM
  23. I know- you said the first line. The rest is my reply. Sometimes something (annoying) happens when I include someone else's quotes in my replies- they "eat" more and more of the text of *my* message as I go in to try and fix it. It's like a tar baby thing, you just get deeper and deeper in. In the end, half my post ends up in the quotes section and I can't fix it.
  24. > {quote:title=FredCDobbs wrote}{quote} > > I can't believe you like the sanitized Code-Spade better. > > > > > > NOTE: OH NO! THE QUOTES ARE EATING ME TEXT. I'M STOPPING EDITING NOW. > > > > > > note- I am trying to think of the least around the elbow route to the a** of the story I want to tell, but. here goes: > > > > I'm 35 years old, so I predate VCRs slightly. One of my earliest memories is going to see a screening of The Maltese Falcon at the local library with my father (a big Bogart fan.) > The film made a *huge impression* on me because it was- I think- my first real exposure to a view of *the complexities of life and the various shades of morality in the world.* It was the first thing I'd ever seen that wasn't Care Bears and rainbows and muppets tap-dancing on tabletops- it was *real.* Huston the director and Bogart the actor (and Hammett the writer) give us a film/performance/story that is multi-layered, shaded, debateable (Sam Spade: Hero/Heel/ or both?) *complicated and believable.* And it's not even so much a movie as it is *a machine* (and I mean that in the highest sense of flattery) that chugs along, wastes no time, and trusts the audience to keep up with it.It is story telling at its finest- no moment is wasted, no fat- just chug chug chug to "the stuff that dreams are made of." That is *a lot harder to do* than what Roy Del Ruth and Ricardo Cortez did in 1931: which was (by all appearances to me) *"let's get this one done quick, and put me over as a REAL heel this time- you know the dames go nuts when I'm a heel!"* I seriously doubt any more thought was put into the venture than that. I mean, I am just thinking back now to all the scenes of characters frittering away their time in the 1931 version sleeping, playing solitaire, making coffee, SLEEPING MORE- by the end scene it's like they want the film to end as much as we are; there's (I swear) a minute-and-a-half long establishing shot of San Francisco at the very beginning (okay, we get it: it's set in SF, *NOW WHAT ABOUT THE "IT?"* ) there's the aforementioned lengthy (and DULLY shot) scene of Spade ransacking Miss Wonderly's place; there's even stuff shown that the director doesn't need to show us- like the connection scene between Cairo and Guttman or the clumsy scebe where WE ALL CLEARLY, CLEARLY SEE Gutman order the guy to drug the (criminally oblivious) Spade. No, it was a terrible movie Just clunk, clunk, clunk. Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jun 8, 2013 1:54 PM Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jun 8, 2013 1:56 PM
© 2019 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
×
×
  • Create New...