AddisonDeWitless

I understand you're not a fan, but it was something commonly called a "joke."

I feel like I've derailed this post with me rants about Criterion. Please scroll four posts down to the post from *Calvinnme* and read about the travails this guy has had with the Warner Archive. Anyone who reads it will think twice about ordering any of those DVDs (and the second thought will in all likelihood be, "um thanks, but I'll pass.") Dude, really, you should write Ted Turner or something with those grievances, cause that is *inexcusable.*

> {quote:title=tcmsnumberonefan wrote:}{quote}The distaste for Criterion is interesting. I've only bought three titles from them (Black Narcissus and The Red Shoes on Blu-Ray and Ikiru on DVD) All three are pretty well packed with documentaries and interview footage. Are these the exception? I can't say about all of them, and I think a lot of the newer titles that end up on Criterion are *loaded* with bonus features- to the point that a lot of the editions are double disc and upwards of $45.00 or more. But, the Criterion DVDs I have checked out- The Horse's Mouth, All that Heaven Allows, The Scarlet Empress and a couple others that I can't recall at the moment (lame I know, but momma's gettin' old) have *seriously underwhelmed me in the bonus features department,* and in the case of Empress, the print and sound were terrible (of course, that may just be the case with the film itself*.)* *I have NEVER seen a Criterion DVD with extras that were anything compared to the extras on a lot of studio-release, $15-$20 DVDs in my collection.* My beef with Criterion is (again) the fact that if you want to own All That Heaven Allows or anything Kurasawa ever did on DVD, then you *must pay $30.00 for it.* And the bonus features are nowhere NEAR substantial enough to validate that extra ten bits, ditto for The Horse's Mouth, which I broke down and bought (used for about $27) years ago as it is one of my favorites. The extras on it are pathetic- a dull five minute short that has nothing to do with the film itself other than it played in some theaters before the movie back in 1958, a trailer, and a brief intro by Ronald Neame. Period. I don't see the need for the $32.00 price tag no matter how damn good the print is, and I am not a print snob to begin with.) And don't get me started on anyone who is stupid enough to pay $32 for Carnival of Souls or Robinson Crusoe on Mars. Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Sep 15, 2012 8:19 PM

Thanks to everyone for explaining. So basically, these Warner Archive deals are about on a par with bootleg MST3K DVDs or fan rips of The Star Wars Holiday Special. They need to be $5.99-$9.99 in that case, because there is *no excuse* for charging $20.00 for that, 'specially as it's costing them *nowhere near that to manufacture them* and they make a good profit on the shipping and handling.

wow.

and thank you for your feedback. you're the second person to mention Olivefilms to me, just last week I was mentioning that I am a fan of No Man of Her Own (1950) with Barbara Stanwyck, and someone mentioned Olive has released the film on DVD.

Criterion **** me off. If a classic title is on Criterion, that means that it *is not available in any other format* (possibly there are exceptions, but I can't think of any, and this includes some studio films like The Horse's Mouth, All That Heaven Allows (maybe all of Sirk's titles now that I think about it) and The Scarlet Empress ) and the average price of a Criterion DVD is $35. That is ludicrous, especially since I have checked out numerous Criterion DVDs (back before I had to cancel me Netflix) and *in every single case* there were negligable bonus features (usually a trailer, color bars (for some reason) and sometimes a grainy interview with the director or a reprinted- and very dull- essay someone published years ago that you could no doubt FIND ONLINE but that you can scroll through with your remote if you really really want. Whoopee.) Compare that to *any number of other classic DVDs* released by studios that cost $20-$25 and contain (in some cases) a second DVD loaded with documentaries, extra versions and bonus material. The DVDs for The Philadelphia Story, The Big Sleep, The Wizard of Oz, The Joan Crawford Collection and ALL the Universal horror titles come to mind. There is no defense for Criterion, but every time I go into this spiel, someone chimes in with how awesome the prints and sound are. They're nowhere near awesome enough to validate an extra $15 on the price, nor is the kicky cover art, and in the case of The Scarlet Empress the print and sound are atrocious. Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Sep 15, 2012 12:54 PM

I've seen a lot of grumblings about The Warner Archive on the boards, but I've never figured out what the chief problem is. Is it the print quality? A lack of bonus features? Bad sound/ transfer? Personally, I'd rather have some of these films available in some form at a reasonable price than not have them available at all or (worse) overpriced by at least $10 with the same lack of bonus features and bad prints to boot (yes, *Criterion,* I mean *you* )

> {quote:title=SansFin wrote:}{quote} > I believe the difference is that in pre-code movies people could have fun with no consequences.During the code they had to show dire complications from even a moment of unprotected fun. True, although there are some exceptions to this in pre-code flicks, especially with regard to drinking when Prohibition was still in effect. And it is to note that the child in Johnny Belinda is the result of a (pretty shockingly and openly depicted) rape, that's two hot button issues dealt with in a fair, open-minded and articulate way in a big studio picture made right in the middle of the Code Era. I just wish the film itself ( Belinda ) and (especially) the performance of Jane Wyman were stronger, but the facts that the material was such a HUGE hit (one of the top five Box Office movies of 1948, and that's back when everybody went to the movies) and that it won Wyman the Oscar, I think, deserve a lot of credit for turning the tide in the way women were depicted onscreen and what issues could be discussed and how openly. For all its shortcomings, I think Johnny Belinda deserves a lot of credit for making a none-too-small chip in The Code.

It is inn-teresting to see how the sympathetic depiction of single motherhood progressed from To Each His Own to Johnny Belinda (Oscars for both leading ladies) to No Man of Her Own (1950) to A Place in the Sun and People Will Talk (both 1951) Am I missing any important films in betwixt?

> {quote:title=clore wrote:}{quote} a friend of mine refers to the film as PEOPLE WILL TALK AND TALK AND TALK. Okay, *I LOVE YOUR FRIEND* and have the feeling we'd get along just fine. ps- that made my day when I read it last night.

> {quote:title=twinkeee wrote:}{quote}AddisonDeWitless, She couldn't have been too 'wooden' or she wouldn't have gotten pregnant! she could've given birth to a bouncing baby popsicle stick. psst! Quiet everybody, but this thing is on u-yay ube-tay. Good print too. I re-watched what I watched already before I fell asleep again at almost the exact same spot all over again. I have to say I found Crain's performance even more lacking the second go-round. A lovely lady, and maybe she was good in other things, but man is she ever sleepwalking through this. Maybe that's how she was told to play it, like she was shellshocked or something. I don't know. I have to say I am also underwhelmed by her work in Pinky, but then again, it's a hard battle for her there seeing as how she is *so* miscast.

...and then at the end when she called Osborne a "prince" ("has anyone ever told you that? Well, you are.") seems like maybe Betty got her Prince after all.

I'll second the *W.C. FIELDS* sentiment. All that I have been able to see of his work is The Bank Dick (which TCM shows a lot, but I don't care I watch it every time it comes on) and David Copperfield (which TCM shows *a lot* period.) I know some of the titles are Paramounts though, so it's likely they'll sit in the salt mines 'til doomsday. It's a shame, because I'm not sure how many are on DVD (not like I have that option anyway) and all are barred from u-yay ube-tay. From what I've seen, the man was an absolute hoot. His movies are such a refreshing departure from the sepia-toned, Andy Hardy, "golly gee, ain't this swell" stuff of the mid thirties to early forties, and are just the thing to (possibly) attract *new viewers.* Maybe if someone sent a really nice edible arrangement to Paramount?

> {quote:title=twinkeee wrote:}{quote} > > Maybe the Benadryl hadn't worn off yet, that happens......might try Clariten next time, non drowsy;) > Unfortunately, Claritin works for like an hour for me, then wears off completely- ditto Allegra. Poppin' Bennies is the only way I can make it through the day without looking like Charles Laughton in The Hunchback of Notre Dame by noon. (I live in the Southeast and have terrible mold allergies.) Thank you to everyone who hath replied, I soitanly would like to see the film in full, and I realize me criticism won't be fully valid until I make it all the way through *but I still don't buy the whole suicide attempt in the waiting room thing.* And now that everyone has explained to me about the false miscarriage, I have to say I have an issue with that too. Isn't it part of the Hippocratic oath that you not deliberately mis-diagnose someone's condition no matter what the motive? I mean, someone just deserves to know *the truth* about their condition. With all the *lengthy*, didactic, diatribing and expostulating sermons Grant went on (and on) about the duties and definition of a doctor in the first half-hour alone- I think he missed a basic lesson here. *Again though- I did conk out before the third act.* I also have meant to do some research into the likelihood of someone commiting suicide in a public place - I still say that that is *very unlikely*+.+ P'raps a simple re-write wherein Crain's character attempts killing herself somewhere later would've made the whole thing easier to digest, it's perfectly logical Grant could find this out, p'raps via the radio or police. I also would recommend losing the gun angle as that makes the whole thing even more outlandish. Pills are the way to go on this one. Had this been 1950-51 and I found meself on the Fox Lot, I'd've recommended these little changes to Uncle Joe...and in all likelihood found meself on the recieving end of a dressing down of a lifetime. ps- anyone else think Jeane Crain was a little wooden? I like her, but... Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Sep 13, 2012 9:01 AM

they just showed the scene at the breakfast room table in The Mirror Has Two Faces. Again: *she should've won.*

Watching the Private Screening with Bacall right now. *LOVE* the story about her telling off Princess Grace in re to her "stealing" her role in Designing Woman. And for the record, I'd rather watch Bacall in that movie any day than be forced to watch La Princess trod out that tired old pisselegant bit of hers she'd been working since High Noon.

Oh Zhank you!

*Very* nice write-up of Stanwyck v. Davis (if I must frame it that way.) Note: I've read that Barbara and Bette *hated each others guts,* and yes- they did work together one other time, in 1932's So Big! and (allegedly) the feud stemmed from there. However, it is to note Stanwyck was *very good friends* with numerous costars (Brent, Fonda, Joe Cotton, RJ Wagner, Farley Granger, Leslie Caron etc) and had a life-long friendship with Joan Crawford of all people. In fact, it is rumored that Crawford had a picture of Stanwyck on her nightstand when she died. *ps- irony of ironies: George Brent is also in So Big! which - according to imdb- is supposed to have that exclamation mark at the end of the title- make of that what you will.* Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Sep 12, 2012 4:03 PM

*Full disclosure*: it's allergy season. I took a Benadryl last night and conked out about thirty minutes into this thing, which I found to be rather inn-teresting in spite of the slightly wooden acting by some and the typical, thoroughly unnatural, Joseph L. Mankiewiczian "golly gee, aren't I brilliant?" dialogue (he was the Aaron Sorkin of his day IMO.) I also know that the Q&A forum may be more the place for this, but I'm looking for a wider audience, sue me. So, for those who saw it, explain this: Jeane Crain goes to Cary Grant (the dreamiest Gynecologist EVER) and he tells her, she's pregnant (bonus points for actually saying "The P Word" in a pre-1966 film!) She's not married, so *immediately* after leaving *she tries to commit suicide by shooting herself in the lobby of his office, point blank. She somehow survives ("so few people know where the heart is, they so often miss") but miscarries.* My question: *what the hell?* Do women normally pack heat when they go to the gynecologist? (If so, I understand, you have to do something to make sure the guy warms his hands up.) Do people often misfire in their attempts to kill themselves *at point blank range* ? Wouldn't it have been better for her to have tried offing herself later, not in a public place, not moments after learning of her pregnancy, does this scan with you guys? And since she miscarries, is there not some sort of greater moral question about this that was (perhaps!) missed- *again, I cannot fully criticize this since I did, yes, conk out circa thirty minutes into this thing.* But I admit befuddlement and consternation to this- if I missed something, please- Mankiewicz experts on the board, illuminate me.

I went through a whole, whole bunch that did not post. Finally found one. The one I tried initially had Nurse Diesel on the phone, while the bay window behind her casts a cobweb-like pattern on the wall, a la' Suspicion. God, what a handsome woman.

Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Sep 12, 2012 10:13 AM

I would *love* to see Von Sternberg's American Tragedy, 'specially since I am no fan of the too-often shown A Place in the Sun.

I used to live and work in HOLLYWOOD. I spent some time laboring under a business manager to some of the (at the time) biggest female stars in town. One star in particular vehemently denied having ANY sort of plastic surgery done EVER. Honey, I have held the AmEx bill for one facelift and brow work in my hand (and she got a really good deal on it too.) And no, I am not telling you who, because there is a chance she could find me and kill me. (I think she has maybe since 'fessed up to having some stuff done, but only post-2005) lies. Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Sep 12, 2012 9:56 AM

> {quote:title=finance wrote:}{quote}Bacall aged considerably in the 4 or so years between KEY LARGO and HOW TO MARRY A MILLIONAIRE. Heavy smoking will do that. Yes, that is true but... *Every* time I hear how Dixon Steele in In a Lonely Place is "as close to Bogart playing Bogart as he ever came" I think "Je-****, WHO would want to wake up with THAT in the morning?" My God, ask him to pass the toast and you get the life choked out of you. I've read that Bogart had a curmudgenly (sic) personality and a mile-wide mean streak, it's hard to believe Betty never saw that side of him- 'specially as they were both running through the hurdles of the dying studio system- no easy feat. I recall Bacall's documentary Bacall on Bogart claims Bogie was "a gent," but at the same time, it gives a decidedly rose-tinted view of Bogie's attempts to "stand up" to the HUAC, something Stephen Bogart debunked in his own Bogart doc. Maybe she guilded the lily a tad, Lord knows every marriage had bumps. I know a lot of writers have tried to debunk the myth that Tracy and Hepburn were some kind of a dream couple, in real life he was an abusive alcoholic, she the nursemaid. Who knows if maybe the same could be true of the Bogart household...although if people want the illusion of bliss about it, I certainly understand. Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Sep 11, 2012 8:05 PM