Jump to content

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

UniversalHorror

Members
  • Content Count

    318
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

About UniversalHorror

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. > {quote:title=lizzyanne wrote:}{quote}I recently purchased Wings to add to my Academy Award Winners collection, and I was enchanted by the novelty of silent film, and the unique way it entertained that talkies do not. I'm curious by your phrase "the novelty of silent film". Why do you refer to them as a "novelty"? ?:| That's how movies were for over 30 years before sound came along...they were silent. I don't consider them a novelty...just the same as any sound film. Movies are movies.
  2. What you should really do with your DVR in an instance like this is to set it to begin a minute or two before the evening's programming begins, starting with the first film...and then just set it to run overtime for the entire evening to get everything. That's what I frequently do to make sure I catch all of a program or movie. > {quote:title=TCMfan23 wrote:}{quote} > My 6 hour video tape will run out at 11pm. I have to switch tapes. I'm hoping to record all of 'Tillie's punctured romance'. > > I should of got myself an 8 hour cassette. > Yes, you should *have* used a T160/8 hour tape and...as I described above for the DVR...just set it to record the entire evening for the full length of the tape.
  3. The intros would also depend on how the shorts are grouped by theme, etc. It would make sense to group them thematically and do an intro for each "theme".
  4. > {quote:title=RaquelVixen wrote:}{quote}Nice to converse with you, but maybe some other time. B-) This is PRECISELY the problem I described in the Flamewars thread...how people either misinterpret things other posters say as being negative, or they twist things around from whatever and however they were intended to be. You're doing the same thing with Sepiatone in this thread too.
  5. > {quote:title=RaquelVixen wrote:}{quote}It seemed a bit mocking considering that I said McDees serves up bad product. It's HUMOR, for cryin' out loud. :0 Lighten up. I happen to like McDonald's double bacon cheeseburgers, incidentally. :^0 You said...which I found funny, by the way: > {quote:title=RaquelVixen wrote:That is a universally horrifying sight....... :0}{quote}
  6. > {quote:title=RaquelVixen wrote:}{quote}Why the smarminess? I don't get it. Uh...it's called levity or humor. Sorry if you're reacting so negatively to it.
  7. > {quote:title=ValeskaSuratt wrote:}{quote}I don't understand why you and finance prefer that I post elsewhere since contributing facts and information to discussions of classic movies hardly strikes me as offensive or even problematical. I agree.
  8. > {quote:title=RaquelVixen wrote:}{quote}That is a universally horrifying sight....... :0 He's offering a bite of it to you... :^0
  9. > {quote:title=RaquelVixen wrote:}{quote}McDonalds has sold more greasy burgers than any album and most people would conclude that the product doesn't translate into quality. That is so obvious.
  10. > {quote:title=TopBilled wrote:}{quote}Even something like ROMEO & JULIET has a lot of subtext. ...and many movies have been done which have used the basic Romeo & Juliet story as the subtext for those films. Just watched *Cry-Baby* again last week during which I began thinking "This is really Romeo & Juliet they're doing here". The whole basic thing about people from two different classes which are usually at odds with each other, even though the two main characters find an attraction to each other is Romeo & Juliet, really. Some other musical examples are *Grease* , *Hairspray* , and *West Side Story* , just to name three.
  11. > {quote:title=Capuchin wrote:}{quote} > > {quote:title=UniversalHorror wrote:}{quote} > > The problem with political discussions is when the politics moves away from the film relevancy and the discussion turns into only the politics, with the film seemingly forgotten in the replies. > I'm not sure I understand your position. > > Are you saying a discussion shouldn't be only about politics, even when it's the politics in the movie? The Kubrick/2001 thread cited below, as I already said down there, is a perfect example. It was deleted because it not only became a flame war, but it TOTALLY moved away from the subject of the movie and became nothing more than a political discussion which lost any references to the movie. People were ONLY talking about the politics/politicians.
  12. > {quote:title=hamradio wrote:}{quote}Regarding Napolean films, I can't decide which one is funnier, Inspector Dreyfuss (Herbert Lom) playing the role or Napolean matching wits with Bugs Bunny. > > Bunny[/i]Part+Still.JPG] Definitely Bugs and Napoleon.
  13. > {quote:title=clore wrote:}{quote}It will spare you from being lumped in with "the clique" that others often imagine is a conspiracy against them. > > Not that such conspiracies can't exist, but I think they're far less prevalent than presumed. Absolutely...once in awhile some have complained about a "clique" here...I don't believe there is any such thing. Only individuals, not a group.
  14. > {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote}Right, like what happened with the thread about that Stanley Kubrick film concerning space travel. Exactly. Perfect example.
© 2019 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
×
×
  • Create New...