AddisonDeWitless
-
Posts
1,672 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by AddisonDeWitless
-
-
Loretta don't get much love on the boards,
I think more than one thread has been dedicated to the rather dubious choice the Academy made on that rainy night in 1948 when Miss Young walked off with the Oscar for her Svedish accented yokel in The Farmer's Daughter over Roz Russell and others...Also also, there seems to be a bit of a bias against her for her Catholic faith (she's seen as a hypocrite by some) and her genuinely cheesey (and genuinely entertaining) post-film television series.
As an actress, she's a B in my book, even when she's terrific (as in 1946's The Stranger+ ) there are moments where she's not completely genuine...but (like Crawford) she's nearly always inn-teresting.
She was also a lovely and very sexy woman, someone once said "her main claim to fame was looking 50 when she was 20 and looking 20 when she was 50" and I have to agree.
Her private life was also inn-teresting to say the damn least.
I had never seen any of her pre-code work though and was really stunned at how solid she was in Born to be Bad she seemed to be having an utter blast throughout the whole sordid affair, it was the best I've ever seen her (and there were still a few moments where she fumbled the ball, her looooong impassioned speech to Henry Travers at the beginning of the film comes to mind, but she still did a pretty fine job.)
The film, in spite of a promising first act, kind of turned into piffle and the non-ending was typical of an early 30's programmer...But oh Loretta!
It would be fantastic to see A Zoo in Budapest and Midnight Mary too.
Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jul 26, 2012 7:58 PM
-
You win: I get it now.
-
> {quote:title=Hibi wrote:}{quote}My main complaint about these tributes is who gets them and who doesnt. I'm still ticked (10 years later) they did nothing for Teresa Wright....People like Ann Sothern and Jane Russell didnt get any. I understand they cant do one for every single actor on earth who dies. But people who WERE stars get ignored.........
You nailed it. Thank you.
ps- I could swear there was a tribute to Ann Sothern though, but maybe not...Either way it wasn't a 24 hour thing.
-
> {quote:title=kriegerg69 wrote}{quote}
> When Olivia DeHavilland goes, she should get 24 hours.
damn straight. (may it be many years down the road though)
-
All right, let's get a few things straight right here and right now:
Ernest Borgine was an Oscar-winning actor who appeared in numerous films and did a lot of charitable work for Veterans and was great in Marty. He also played Ernest Borgnine when an "Ernest Borgnine-type" was needed in a few films that managed to be all right in spite of his presence, ie- Johnny Guitar, Bad Day at Black Rock, From Here to Eternity (a solid performance actually) and The Wild Bunch.
He also was in a loooooooooooooooong list of absolutely atrocious to ludicrous films in which he played, again, Ernest Borgnine. Willard, The Poseidon Adventure (admit it, it's stupid), Merlin's Shop of Mystical Wonders, The Oscar, The Legend of Lylah Clare, The Devil's Rain...Do I need to go on?
Obviously he merits a tribute, but a whole day?
*Really?*
I mean, Jennifer Jones got four films (and aside from Beat the Devil, they did not showcase her best work.) Pat Neal got an evening (I think). I know Elizabeth Taylor got a whole day, but she rated it (so did Neal and Jones too for my money.)
I know this is maybe a little petty and mean, and yes, I know I can (and have) turned off the TV all today and all through the night. It's been a rocking week on TCM what with Berkely Square and the 1934 Born to be Bad, and I'm not annoyed or tweaked or peeved that they've taken the time to set a whole day aside for someone who...well, someone whose work just doesn't measure up to that of some other people who got a less-than-adequate sendoff...
But I am a tad incredulous.
Anyone else?
ps- feel free to take me to task for my not grasping the importance in his being Ernest in everything he ever did, ever. (Aside from Marty. )
-
OH THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!!!!!!
-
All right, the details are sketchy, but here is what I have to go by:
This was possibly an episode of a British horror anthology series (maybe Hammer House of Horror, maybe not) and it was included on a VHS tape hosted by Elvira, Mistress of the Dark that could be rented back in the 80's.
I have tried to find an imdb credit/listing for it, but no dice. I know this thing exists though.
In the tape, she introduced three or four segments, likely edited down from their originals.The two that were burned in my brain are:
A scheming man and woman conspire to take a rich, but odd, young man for a ride by having the woman woo and marry him (I think some jewels in a safe are their ultimate target) Unbeknownst to them, the man has telekenitic powers and can burn things with his mind when he gets upset. (A cat kills some birds he has been feeding and he roasts the cat with his mind, it's sick.) Anyhow, the spooky millionaire catches the woman in the safe and in the final scene she returns to her con-artist boyfiend all barbecued and hideous and chanting "you said you loved me" over and over.
Next episode:
A couple end up in a village filled with vampires. They escape using a gold crucifix from the church and are rescued by police officers who take them right back to the village because, they too are vampires (freaky last shot of the cops turning around and sporting long, eerie fangs, and the whole thing is tinted blue- it's some creepy s***.)
I saw these countless times as a child and they are part of the reason I am so messed up. Needless to say, I would love to see them again. Anyone know the names of these, availablity, any leads, anything?
Help appreciated- especially you Horrorphiles who I know are on these boards.
Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jul 25, 2012 9:44 PM
-
> {quote:title=FredCDobbs wrote:}{quote}
> Screenplay worked on by John L. Balderston, who wrote the play that the original Dracula film was based on. Also wrote for Frankenstein, Bride of Frankenstein, The Mummy...
How inn-teresting that you point this out, because as I watched it (like many of you) for the first time last night, I was taken by how much darker the tone pf the film was than what I expected (which was more on the side of light fantasy, possibly with elements of adventure and romance, something with a hint of Howard's later triumph in The Scarlet Pimpernel.)
But while the film was definitely fantasy, it was not light. I love thirties fantasy, and the tone of this was so strange. This was a really unique film. It was- in a pat but nonetheless apt way of putting it: quite ahead of its time.
There were even quite a few moments where I felt elements of a horror film, the strange montage of modern-day violence and machinery that unfolded from Howard's eyes into the mind of Heather Angel's character, the mentality of "the villagers" who fear that certain intangible, but nonetheless off-setting, something in Howard's gaze... and I was particularly reminded of Valerie Hobson's performance in The Bride of Frankenstein by the (very good) performance of the older sister, who thought Howard was in league with the Devil.
It was a very good print, wasn't it?
I didn't you called it "Barklee" Square. That makes no sense to me, but whatever.
I think Leslie Howard deserved his Oscar nomination for this.
And it was fun to see Osborne's obvious enthusiasm and hear that pining in his voice when he talked about how long he (like a lot of us) has wanted to see this.
A BIG, BIG THANK YOU TO WHOEVER WORKED HARD TO ACQUIRE THE RIGHTS TO THIS, KEEP IT UP WITH THE NEW STUFF AND THANK YOU, TCM.
-
I vote AudreyForever for GP.
-
Okay then, give us *from eight to sixteen films than you think are really Essential* Essentials. (And they don't have to all be *GREAT* films, just inn-teresting.)
Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jul 23, 2012 4:57 PM
Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jul 23, 2012 4:58 PM
-
> {quote:title=cinecrazydc wrote:}{quote}
> {font:Times New Roman}I’ve got a possible antidote. How about having more “fan” programmers. This might also help get out the “rut” of repeats that so many have been complaining about and give folks the opportunity to have some of the films that have been talked about to be shown. {font}
I'm with that. And if they do a contest again, I do so wish they wouldn't require one to do a web-video of oneself. Some of us are practically Luddites when it comes to technology.
ps- if money and *rights* were not an issue and the filmakers themselves were given the choice of any venue to show their films, I am sure most true artistes would without hesitation say "TCM" because they (usually) show the best, cleanest, most thoroughly intact versions.
Honestly, it would be very painful for any real filmaker who was proud of their work in any measure to sit and watch what AMC does to a movie even if it does mean a little more on the back end for them.
-
aw, twice in three months isn't too, too bad.
it occurred to me this morning as I was sitting through some VERY OFFENSIVE AND INNAPROPRIATE commercials at CNN.COM, that we are SO LUCKY to have ANY KIND of a network with no** advertising PERIOD, much less one that shows CLASSIC MOVIES ALL THE TIME.
it was an epiphany of sorts to realize that it cannot possibly be easy for the programmers and rights department to do what they do with no ad revenue at all.
Suddenly, I feel kind of like a kid who is kvetching about "beans n' weenies AGAIN?????? " when Mom's had to take in laundry and sell her diamond ring and turn tricks on the side just to score tonight's groceries.
So I'm not saying I'm never going to leap into the "why are they showing SuchandSuchFilm freakin' again?" argument, but maybe I'll reserve it for the weekend and prime time scheduling, or when they reheat and serve as Essentials or tribute features.
**- okay, they shill their DVDs and the occasional coffee mug. I can live widdat.
-
> {quote:title=finance wrote:}{quote} Interesting that A FACE IN THE CROWD pilloried Godfrey and SWEET SMELL OF SUCCESS pilloried Walter Winchell, both in the same year.
Actually Face came out in 1957 and Sweet Smell came out in 1958.
And Face is a more general, fictionalized amalgamation of numerous figures while there is NO QUESTION that Success is all about Winchell.
But I get your point.
-
> {quote:title=hlywdkjk wrote:}{quote}
>
> Very few Guest Programmers watch TCM on a daily basis. (Though I do believe Drew Barrymore when she says she has it on in her home everyday. And I think Tracy Ullmann and Cher are avid viewers.)
>
Then Drew is even less perceptive than some of us have labelled her because over half of her selections have ALREADY been selected as Essentials, some in the last 2 years. (And the other half are nothing to get excited about.)
She's a big name, and it was a coup for the Network to get her (and it was nice of her to take time out of her busy schedule) but someone, somewhere really should have given her the feedback that, like, EIGHT of the films she picked had been done quite recently because they're RUNNING THE CONCEPT INTO THE GROUND.
I despise Tracey Ullman. (That has nothing to do with anything, just any time someone invokes her name a Pavlovian reflex comes over me and I have to say that I hate Tracey Ullman and her racist, unfunny schtick.)
Yes, I know this was kind of a negative (and redundant) post but it's a slow day.
Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jul 21, 2012 12:20 PM
-
I am surprised I am the first to do a post-showing post, but here goes:
Inn-teresting night, although I conked out by the last feature. I would have to say it this was one of those cases where it seems like someone at the network actually watched the movies before they aired them as they were definitely in order from best to least inn-teresting.
Shopworn was not a great movie, but oh was it fun when it had its moments, especially the scene where Barbara informs her lover's mother's lackey in no uncertain terms that she is not taking a pay-off. Did anyone notice how Barbara literally quivered in many of her scenes- notable also in the jailhouse breakdown (which I took to mean that she had miscarried)? The exploration of the Oedipal issues was also noteworthy, and I just love when big female stars get put in stir (Barbara did about as much prison time in her early talkies as Wallace Beery.) Also also noteworthy was the fact that Barbara's "leading" man (whose name I have understandably forgotten) was one of the worst actors I have ever seen. Ever. Seen. Ever. If he'd been replaced and the last act had been tighter, Shopworn would've really been something to remember.
Ten Cents a Dance also started out very strong, but ran out of steam by the end. Although it is to note that even the most mediocre of the early pre-code films is still inn-teresting for its honest depiction of life and the troubles we all face, ie- meeting someone who seems like they're a terrific person, until you marry them and they rip off the mask to reveal a screaming demon beneath. Three on a Match also comes to mind as an example of a pre-code that's not great, but is still commendable for its honest look at relationships, stripped of that certain "just add water and you're done" romanticization of love that occurs in many post-code films.
I don't remember much about Illicit outside of the pussyfooting.
-
In the late 1970's, there was an awful Charlie's Angels ripoff flick called Angels Revenge, AKA Seven from Heaven. It was featured during the Comedy Central years of Mystery Science Theater and is available on DVD or on youtube, in whole, for free.
There are numerous cameos from a bizarre grab bag of Hollywood refugees and has-beens, among them Pat Bertram, Jim Backus, Alan Hale, a verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry drunk Peter Lawford and Arthur Godfrey, who appears in a brief scene in the first twenty minutes or so.
They rip on him quite well, the rest of the film is a treat too.
-
"Ten cents a dance, that's what they pay me. Gee, how it wears me down. Ten cents a dance, pansies and rich guys, rough guys who tear my gown."
Fighters and sailors and bowlegged tailors
can pay for their ticket and rent me!
Butchers and barbers and rats from the harbors
are sweethearts my good luck has send me.
Though I've a chorus of elderly beaux ,
stockings are porous with hole at the toes.
I'm here till closing time.
Dance and be merry, it's only a dime.
Sometimes I think I've found my hero, but it's a queer romance. All that you need is a ticket. Come on, big boy, ten cents a dance
-Roget undte Hardte
-
What are the films ?
Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jul 19, 2012 9:25 AM
-
Clearly Sir, you have no humility.*
(Arthur Godfrey reference)
-
Allrightallrightokay,
I want to get a few things out right now:
No anger here. No malice. It's a great film. Andy Griffith is fantastic, agree pretty strongly with Danny Peary in his excellent and sadly out of print MUST HAVE tome Alternate Oscars that my fellow North Carolinian deserved the Big Gold Gong as Best Actor of 1957 for his grandiose turn as Lonesome D. Sociopath. I also take the aside to note that Patricia Neal is- as always- FANTASTIC in this (I am so sorry she is gone. She was just the best ). In fact, I dare say her peformance is the BEST IN THE FILM. It's also well shot, moodily in that Sweet Smell Of Successish style borderline noir (only I don't like The Sweet Smell of Success. )
It's prescient as hell, contemporary, and- however you feel about Kazan, solidly helmed.
It is also a film, much like A Streetcar Named Desire or All Quiet on The Western Front or The Grapes of Wrath, that you see for the first time and go: "wow, there was really not a single flaw in that thing...but I don't want to see it again any time soon."
Which brings me to...
Lord Love a duck ye hath sucked the very marrow from it, TCM.
It is on A LOT in prime time. Lately I have noticed it's been shifted more to the graveyard slot, but still. It was part of the tribute, I think, when Pat Neal died. It was on one SUTS a coupla' years ago in PRIME TIME for Lee Remick even though she's in the damn thing for five minutes (ever heard of Wild River (1960) ?)
It's on tonight, understandably at the 8:00 pm slot as it is the best thing Andy Griffith ever did (ARGUABLY.) But after this, can we cool it?
I know you can't help what the GP's pick, but might I suggest that when you book someone, send out the catalogue with one of those edible arrangements (chocolate recommended), the card to which should say "thank you for taking the time to help us out, let us know your four film picks and two alternates as soon as you can so that we can send the elves down to the salt mines to fetch them. By the way EVERYONE AND THEIR MOTHER HAS ALREADY PICKED A Face in The Crowd. Duck Soup, Wuthering Heights, Some Like it Hot and The Third Man to be their films. We recommend just about anything else."
An edible arrangement can soothe ever the most bruised of egos, I know this from experience.
Bottom line: sometimes jewels are more precious if they are trotted out but occasionally.
-
oh no. it was sarcasm.
those are all Fox titles that've been on TCM once or twice in the last six months and while I didn't think some of them were "all that" it was GREAT to be able to see them at last and I'll take them, flaws and all, over the usual suspects any ole' day. They also started some inn-teresting discussions on the boards, especially The Razor's Edge.
And I still remember that lovely Christmas Eve showing of Cluny Brown. Christmas is NOT one of my favorite times o-the year and it cheered me up so much.
The acquisitions TCM has made- not just from Fox but Universal as well- over the past 12-18 months have been wonderful.
Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jul 17, 2012 9:59 PM
-
Hangover Square *really* ought to be an Essential. It's one of the those classics that even people who aren't "in" to classics can enjoy.
-
> {quote:title=Hibi wrote:}{quote}Yes, some of them have been in rotation recently, but havent been on TCM in years before that........(and probably wont be again once their rental agreements run out....)
Still: TCM got 'em, and the more positive feedback they get for it, the better the chances we may see other Foxey titles like In Old Chicago or Nightmare Alley or Laura or Hangover Square or (joy of joys!) the elusive Cluny Brown.
The infusion of new blood from the Fox Vault has been wonderful.
Thank you, programmers.
-
Your assessment of Tarkington and the novel Alice Adams is excellent, but it brings back the white wave of hatred I felt on finishing it some twenty years ago. Lord above us in heaven, *I HATE THAT F-ING BOOK.*
He could've used you as an editor.
it just occured to me: since everyone's gone so gaga for going back and fudging with Pride and Prejudice and Dracula and Wuthering Heights with sequels and re-boots and fan fic, someone should do a story called Malice Adams wherein Alice, in the tradition of Balzac's Cousin Bette systematically and methodically plots the destruction of all those around her. She, of course, succeeds utterly.
What think?
Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Jul 17, 2012 5:01 PM
Borgnine gets a whole day....really?
in Hot Topics
Posted
> {quote:title=)kriegerg69 wrote:}{quote} I won't admit it...I happen to not only love POSEIDON ADVENTURE
Ah, the Poseidon.
I am of many minds when it comes to that 1972 film meself. I think it could have been a truly great film, except that a lot of the dialogue (especially in the pre-capsizing scenes) CLUNKS and some of the actors (Carol Lynley and Stella Stevens spring immediately to mind) are not on the same level with the rest. I am surprised that it was directed by Ronald Neame for a number of reasons, among them that he did some very intelligent, sharp and literate films- among them Tunes of Glory and The Horse's Mouth, also this whole thing just doesn't seem his cup of tea, and to me: it shows.
It also makes me sad when they kill Shelley.
I'm not sure whether or not you've read the Paul Gallico novel the film is based on, it's actually a bit more realistic and somewhat less brutal with a more multi-layered tapestry of characters...It's by no means a great work of literature, but interesting to check out as a way of seeing how much they changed the story for the film.
Maybe a better directer for the thing would've been Roy Ward Baker, who did A Night to Remember in such a crisp, effective fashion.
BTW: THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS IN THE "INFORMATION PLEASE "FORUM ABOUT THE MONSTER CLUB. I CHECKED IT OUT ON U-YAY UBE-TAY TODAY AND IT WAS EVERY BIT AS F***ED UP AS I REMEMBER! And it was directed by Roy Ward Baker who also did Scars of Dracula, which I did not know before today.
Those two films did so much to mess me up as a kid, thanks again for making it possible to revisit them.