Jump to content

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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About LadyE

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. On the subject of the earlier poster that you had shown, I love how in the late 40s and 50s most film posters tried to oversell the "sex" they could not put on film...it's wonderfully misleading
  2. Here's another Douglas Sirk lover! I went as far as to buying two DVD sets from the french amazon site with his best films and a ton of extras in them (meaningful interviews with Sirk and others who worked with him, documentaries...), and hacked my computer so that it was region-free (there I said it). The French really love Douglas Sirk, those DVD sets are really something, TCM...take a note on the French on how to produce box sets with meaningful extras! I am surprised nobody mentioned *A time to Love and a Time to Die (1958).* Has anybody seen it? Never seen it shown on TCM, but it is one of Sirk's lesser known films and one of his best films IMO.
  3. > {quote:title=Terrence1 wrote:}{quote} > I miss the gems that I've never heard of, or little-known movies that I want to see again. > > > > > > > > Terrence. > My thoughts exactly, but I kind of welcome the month off Being the obssessive compulsive that I am, it's nice not to feel the pressure to scan the TCM guide for those hidden gems at least two months a year (the other one is Summer under the Stars ).
  4. That's too bad...I have not seen TCM lately with the whole Oscar thing, February is a rest month for my DVR...I have seen those films way too many times to care to see them again.
  5. RIP John Kerr....I love Tea and Sympathy, what a wonderful film! Deborah Kerr was flawless as always and John provided the right amount of vulnerability to make his character completely adorable, then it's Vincent Minnelli and technicolor...
  6. > Oh, TCM Underground isn't on next week because TCM will officially be in 31 Days of Oscar mode (now there's blandness for you - I wish TCM would do 31 Days of No Oscar.) I agree with what a few posters said before. It's not that bad, new viewers need to get into the classics and there is a lot to discover still within each month. As Andy mentioned, we are kind of spoiled. Agreed there is much more to uncover, but hey, I think TCM is like the intel chips, they realease things at the pace they want to release them to make it sustainable. If they do it all at once, their business model goes to hell! I personally do not have time to catch up on nearly all the films I want to see. Agreed the 31 days of Oscar are quite boring so I would spice it up and have 31 days of alternative Oscars as voted by TCM viewers! At least it will make it interesting, every year we could vote on 5 years for all categories, so that should be able to run for a few years and keep the viewers engaged
  7. Filmgoddess opened a thread noting that two of the great left us on a day like today, January 20, Barbara Stanwyck, in 1990 and Audrey Hepburn in 1993. Just wanted to note it in this thread since it's appropriate. Incidentally, Audrey was interviewed the day Stanwyck passed and this is what she had to say: "I do think that a monument has left this industry, and she was so versatile, Barbara Stanwyck. A lovely lady, I knew her very little, but admired her a great deal." Audrey and Barbara, two classy ladies and two film legends that will live on forever. God bless them!
  8. Thank you EugeniaH! It has been a real pleasure to participate in this thread so far and other threads that were also really interesting to me. I'm relatively new to these Boards and I am not nearly as knowledgeable and articulate as some posters, so I'm out of my league on other threads, but classic films are very dear to my heart and it's always great to discuss with people in these Boards who share the same enthusiasm . I can tell you as a long admirer of Classic films, my "discovery" of Stanwyck about two years ago made quite an impact on me, as you can see, and compelled me to watch her whole filmopgrahy, something I've only done for Kate Hepburn so far...
  9. Thank you guys! Glad that you enjoyed it! I think probably factors 1 and 3 are the heavier ones for sure. In any case, as someone said earlier in this thread, who cares who won what? What's important is the legacy and the work left behind for us to enjoy! I've been trying to find Time Out's Film Guide for 1994 and 1995. To celebrate the Film Centenary, Time Out Magazine – London Edition did a survey amongst an impressive list of director’s and film critics and asked to provide a list of their top 10 films, directors and actors, which they assembled to create a list of top 100 films, top directors, top actors. They used a point system, and adding all of the points combined…turns out Stanwyck was No. 2 behind Kate Hepburn (my top two!). I have only found one reference to this in a magazine (see link below), I have found the top 100 film list, but never found the other lists. The polls were supposedly included as part of the Time Out Film Guide for 94 or 95. So if anyone ever comes accross that, give me a shout http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-03-16/entertainment/35446820_1_barbara-stanwyck-stella-dallas-frank-capra
  10. > {quote:title=AddisonDeWitless wrote: > }{quote} > I think it's more that Stanwyck, like the similarly Oscarless Irene Dunne and Cary Grant, was pretty much a free-lance artist *without a powerful studio to back her up.* Thus she was not seen as an asset to many and was doubtlessly resented by others. The four actresses she lost Oscars to were all under contract to a big studio or producer- MGM, RKO, Selznick, Warner's... > > Barbara didn't have that big-studio push that it took/takes to put you in the winner's circle. > Since the 31 Days of Oscars are approaching at TCM, I thought it fitting to write about what I call, The Barbara Stanwyck X-File: she never won a competitive Oscar. I came up with a trifecta of factors that worked as the “perfect storm” against Stanwyck come award times. Your thoughts are much appreciated! # *Freelancing* - lack of Studio backing as Addison explains in an earlier post. With the exception of the Warner’s period 1932-1935, Barbara Stanwyck was a freelancer throughout her career. So at Oscar’s time not only she wasn’t block-voted by any particular studio, and was not supported massively by their PR machine, but on top of that she was not given the "prestige" vehicles that top studio stars would be getting that made it "easier" to get nominations and awards to begin with. \ \ # Stanwyck did not play the *PR/Hollywood game* come awards time. Stanwyck was seen as a sort of outsider in Hollywood, especially in the 30s. She was loved by the little people, but not so sure she was liked by the Hollywood elites (respected, yes, but liked/loved?...not sure). Although Stanwyck would do public events as required by the studios where she was working, was respected by coworkers and peers, she was known to be private. She did not host lavish parties for studio execs and producers and she did not attend them either. I doubt she ever even attempted to suck up to the press or openly petition for votes from members. \ \ # {size:small}*She made it look too easy!* Her acting style was considered natural and lacked the affectation that most critics and peers considered inherent to "top acting". She was always called "great natural actress" as if that is something worth noting. Natural acting is now the NORM, but back then, it seems a little affectation was more valued and admired. Robert Osborne mentioned in one of his intros that Bette Davis said to him that in her films she always tried to find ways to remind the audiences that she was “acting”. Stanwyck on the other hand mentioned that when she was doing a role, especially a good one, she was being someone other than herself. That kind of approach to acting was not really appreciated until the method acting became mainstream and popularized a more naturalist, character oriented acting style in the mid 50s. Another important thing to note. With the exception of the Kennedy Center Honors Award, she was awarded every single major career achievement award out there at the end of her career at a time when those awards were also given to the golden age actors, producers, directors (AFI, SAG, LAFC, NYC Lincoln Film Center Honors, Cecil B. DeMille, Oscars). This just confirms that she was massively overlooked in her time. I think on the actress department, only Bette Davis received as many Life Achievements accolades (Kate Hepburn would have also received those if she weren’t so reluctant to appear at Award ceremonies). I know people tend to overlook those life achievement awards, but they do have weigh, especially because she was awarded ALL of them! Anyways, your feedback is gladly appreciated...do I get brownie points for this post? :^0
  11. Hahaha, Andy, I meant that the effect they were looking for towards the audience was to wish nothing happens to her even though she is hateful...I forgot to add that key word...effect on the audience And yeah, I agree, the biggest letdown of SWN is to see Lancaster play such a bland character...could have, should have, would have...been a noir...Like I said, to me is as if she really never worked with Lancaster or Bogart.
  12. > {quote:title=finance wrote:}{quote}Apparently, Hayward has never been SOTM, while certain others have been SOTM more than once That's blasphemy! I think in the past they honored stars that were part of TCM's archive for obvious reasons, $$$, but now that TCM is doing so well financially, they should open up more and start honoring stars from other studios...
  13. > {quote:title=EugeniaH wrote:}{quote} I had mentioned somewhere that Robert Mitchum may have been better in the Lancaster role; even though Lancaster's character was supposed to be weak, I think he underplayed it too much. > > . > SWN was a missed opportunity having such a great leading man like Lancaster, same as with Bogart in the Two Mrs. Carroll...to me is as if they had never worked together really because both Lancaster and Bogart were so miscast/not-their-best in those films I think that in addition to James Stewart and Cary Grant, the only big name she did not work with was Spencer Tracy. I find a lot of similarities between James Stewart and Henry Fonda, so in a way it’s not “disappointing” they did not work together. But Stewart was more expressive, had more fire than Fonda. I’m not sure Stanwyck and Tracy would have worked well, but Tracy was a great actor, so that’s never an issue I would have loved to see Grant and Stanwyck in any type of comedy, that would have been an instant classic. She always wanted to work with him and she was close to do so on two occasions, the closest one was *Once Upon a Honeymoon*, she even did costume tests for the film, but Ginger Rogers snatched it from her. She was also close to co-star with Grant on *Holiday*, she was the first choice until Katharine Hepburn showed interest, and, naturally, being close *friends* with George Cukor, she got the part. Not too sad about *Once Upon a Honeymoon*, but Holiday was a true missed opportunity. I think Kate Hepburn was excellent in it, but Stanwyck would have made her character more earthy, which is something the audiences would have appreciated. Plus, Cukor being such a great actress director…he would have done wonders with Stanwyck, don’t you guys think?
  14. I guess the problem with SWN Andy is that they started off with the 22 minute radio program and they had to create a background story from there. They could have come up with a better story with more layers for sure, but I still find the film suspenseful and very elegantly done. Lancaster is a really weak and completely unsympathetic character but in a way as Hibi mentioned, both characters are really not "listening" to each other...there are traces of goodness in them. But I agree with EugeniaH, he underplayed his character too much to the point of disappearing and it would have been nice to like him a little bit even if he planned to kill his wife...Anyways, the point of the whole film is precisely what you mention, lock that woman up and make her shup up...but on the other hand, don't let anything bad happen to her...which is what they achieved IMO.
  15. > {quote:title=EugeniaH wrote:}{quote} > > Thanks, L.E. I need to take a break from the boards for a bit but couldn't resist responding to your post. Here's my take on these films: > > > > Thanks for stopping by, EugeniaH! I certainly know what you mean about needing to break from Boards for a while, it is addictive and it takes quite a bit of time. I agree with your assessment of Stanwyck's performance in Sorry, Wrong Number....I was expecting over the top (a lot of people had told me so) and I thought it was really fine, layered and in crescendo. I hope you stay for my most anticipated post ...my "study" on why Stanwyck never got a competitive award! I thought it would be appropriate since we are approaching the award Season. I will probably get around to post it tomorrow.
© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
  • Create New...