kriegerg69

Same thing in *The Texas Chainsaw Massacre* movies...cutting people up into food.

*8 Heads In A Duffel Bag* - 'nuff said. *Bring Me The Head of Alfredo Garcia* - also 'nuff said.

*The Corpse Grinders* (1-3) - Bodies are ground up into cat food.

Here's a couple of horror movie "wow...no one has mentioned these yet!": The entire *Phantasm* series (I-IV): The Tall Man Angus Scrimm) steals corpses, compresses them down into dwarves, and uses them as henchmen/slave labor. Several of the *Psycho* films: *Psycho* (1960) - Janet Leigh's body gets wrapped in a shower curtain, stuffed into the trunk of her car, and the car is sunk into the swamp by Anthony Perkins. He also keeps "mother's" body around instead of giving it a decent burial. *Psycho II* (1982) - Vera Miles' body gets buried in a mound of coal in the cellar of the Bates house. *Psycho III* (1986) - One victim's body is temporarily hidden in an ice maker by Perkins and gets frozen inside. He ends up having to break one arm in order to get it out later. The mictims all get dumped into the swamp, too. *Psycho IV: The Beginning* (1990) - After young Norman (Henry Thomas) kills his mother, we get to see the process of him stuffing and preserving the body, which he then keeps around in the house. *Little Shop of Horrors* (1960 and 1986) - One murder victim in each gets cut up into pieces and fed to the hungry plant.

> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote} > > {quote:title=kriegerg69 wrote:}{quote}t. The keyword there should be voluntarily ... I'm going on the assumption that having a separate room for cell users/etc. are for those who DON'T and WON'T turn their devices off. > Gee, I'd always thought that "making a choice" and doing something "voluntarily" were more or less the same thing. > Nobody would be forcing the cell-phone users to use the "cell-phone permitted" screening room. They would be perfectly free to turn them off, choose to use the "cell-phone use prohibited during screening" room, and leave them off until after the film was over . Thjey're not so addicted to the things that they don't know how to turn them off when they want to. Anyone could attend the one kind of screening room or the other, whichever they preferred, as long as they co-operated with the expectations of the cinema rules about it. > In fact, this whole suggestion of mine was about all about that: CHOICE. Geez, you just won't let up with your incessant nitpicking, will you? READ my reply again...I said "those who DON'T and WON'T turn their devices off." Which means those who adamantly WILL NOT, regardless of which segregated room they go into. I'm talking about inconsiderate and bullheaded people who feel they have the right to do what they want to when they want to with their portable devices. I am NOT talking about choice at all in regards to people who WOULD co-operate with the rules. NOW do you understand?? ]

I have an idea: Why not set up an area on the TCM website where anyone can upload a video of themselves explaining the same thing regarding classic movies...and then TCM can pick out the good ones and use them on-air?

Wow..I just thought of a CLASSIC one no one has yet mentioned: The final scene of THE PUBLIC ENEMY, and James Cagney's fate. Still unnerving after all these years.

> {quote:title=clore wrote:}{quote}In THE VAULT OF HORROR, Terry-Thomas was complaining that his wife Glynnis Johns wasn't very neat. Almost as good in the movie ASYLUM, Richard Todd kills his wife and cuts her into pieces, wrapping each neatly in butcher paper and twine...and the wrapped pieces start coming after him for revenge.

> {quote:title=AddisonDeWitless wrote:}{quote}A scene from Neil Simon's 1976 Murder by Death as played by the inimitable Maggie Smith: > > *NORA CHARLESTON* > "Why would anyone want to steal a dead body?" > > Nick leans in an whispers something in her ear. > > > *NORA CHARLESON* > "Oh, that's tacky. That's really tacky." > Great line! I also like when David Niven and a couple of others are examining that same body in the kitchen (before it disappears), and Niven exclaims "Wait! I found a bullet hole!...Oh, sorry. My mistake!" :^0

> {quote:title=Sepiatone wrote:}{quote} > What about *Frankenstein* ? Where do ya think all them parts CAME from? "Limbs 'R' Us"? Yep...that's a good reference, pointing out FRANKENSTEIN. Let's also not forget Laura Palmer on TWIN PEAKS. Her killer wrapped her beautiful body in a plastic shower curtain and dumped it somewhere. How about the killer in SILENCE OF THE LAMBS? Stuffing those insects into the mouths of his victims.

> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote} > "Duh" is right. It's a simple matter to turn off your cell phone and walk into the "cell phone use prohibited" screening room. Or not. The cell phone holder makes a choice as to which they'd rather do, watch a movie while using their phone or ipad or whatever, with others who choose to do the same thing, or not. The keyword there should be voluntarily ... I'm going on the assumption that having a separate room for cell users/etc. are for those who DON'T and WON'T turn their devices off. Uncle Fester had the right attitude: "I'll shoot him in the back!" :^0

> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote} Look, it was just an idea, and it's one I still think is worth at least considering. To say "Did you think about that"? , as though I'm in court or something, seems a little over-reactive. > I did realize that there'd be a number of possible problems to be worked out, but hey, I wasn't presenting a business plan here, this is just a board to discuss ideas and I was suggesting one. That's all. I said "the details and logistics would have to be worked out." > > And I don't think my "solution" is necessarily the right and only one, I just think it's something that's at least worth people going 'Hm, wonder if that would work" instead of "forget it." > > As for the word "segregation" : Your second definition of the word is this: > "to cause or force the separation of ( as from the rest of society)". So, no, I don't think the word is the best to use for what I'm saying, as there's no force involved whatsoever. People could make the choice to turn their cell phone off or not. Hardly the same thing as separate schools in the States until the mid 1960s. > > > What's up with everyone getting so het up about this anyway? All I was saying is I think it's a good idea, and I'm still surprised nobody else does. I'm hardly advocating some kind of draconian law here. > YOU are the one getting up because no one is AGREEING with you. "as there's no force involved whatsoever". Sure there is...if cell users HAD to see a film in a separate "cell users room", then they're being FORCED to go there instead of in the regular room with everyone else. Duh. "something that's at least worth people going 'Hm, wonder if that would work" instead of "forget it."" Ever stop and consider that just maybe people HAVE already thought about it and don't need a lot of time to mull it over? You're nitpicking now.

> {quote:title=Sepiatone wrote:}{quote}I'm sorry, but my vote goes for more stringent enforcement of the rules. NOT throwing my hands up in resignation. If those ill-mannered and thoughtless bufoons wish to use their cell phones when I'm trying to watch a movie, there IS a "special" room for them. It's located through the door marked "EXIT".

> {quote:title=clore wrote:}{quote}This September will see the release of a two-fer with CHILDREN SHOULDN'T PLAY WITH DEAD THINGS and FOREVER EVIL which you can pre-order at Amazon for ten bucks. That's about half of what the previous single releases of the film are commanding. > > There is a 35th anniversary single DVD release, but the word was that it was a sloppy transfer. > The problems with that 35th ann. release were later corrected by VCI. That's the one worth having. The double-feature disc is...I believe...a public domain release. I wouldn't waste my money on it.

> {quote:title=VP19 wrote:}{quote}This is the 20th entry in this thread, and not a single Ted Turner colorization reference has been made. Possibly because the title of this thread is "Legend Films - colorizing classic movies". It's not about Ted Turner's colorizing, of which more than enough has been said elsewhere. It's about Legend Films.

> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote}Triple sigh ... > > And I think all the people on this thread who have said that the cell -phone users ( and talkers and other ( usually young) people who otherwise disrupt the viewing enjoyment for the rest of the audience) should turn their cells off and shut up, are, unfortunately, fighting a losing battle and are being unrealistic. > > > Sheesh, I'm amazed that there's so much objection to this ! > Why? There are theaters that DO enforce such a no-cell policy, particularly when the pre-movie ads on-screen have a very specific "no cells and no talking" policy. If it's disruptive to other viewers, it's disruptive. Period. Why are you amazed at the objections? Simply because no one is agreeing with you?

> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote} > > I'm surprised that not one person agrees with me. > > ps- I ;m a little taken aback by the use of the word "segregation", which is a loaded word. To attend a "cell-phone permitted" or "cell-phone free" screening would be completely a matter of choice. "Segregation" has other connotations. Why? Because you think your "solution" is the right one and the only one? "Segregation" is an entirely appropriate word to use here, even with the racial connotation and efinition it is usually associated with...because the base word, "segregate", according to the dictionary, means: Definition of SEGREGATE 1 : to separate or set apart from others or from the general mass : isolate 2 : to cause or force the separation of (as from the rest of society) Which is exactly what it means in this instance of having separate screening rooms. The other problem with that suggestion is simply that theaters could lose out a lot of money in the process, if there's only a handful of (for example) cell users in that screening room where instead they could be put into the same room FULL of others who are not cell users. The cost of running a separate room would likely be more than it would be worth. Did you think about that?

> {quote:title=MovieMadness wrote:}{quote}Too bad we never got a la carte programming passed so we could pick and choose these things without having to lump them like this. In this day and age of everything being digitally controlled and programmed by computer...one would think you could (and should) be able to pick individual channels to have in your cable service. You know...the cable company charges a certain rate for a certain number of channels, and the subscriber gets to pick and choose which channels those are. Doesn't such a thing exist anywhere? Seems to be it could and should, since the service is essentially computer-controlled and subscribers should be able to choose (within reason, of course).

> {quote:title=clore wrote:}{quote} > That reminds me of Sean Connery coaxing a bad guy to talk by shooting another bad guy who was actually a corpse in THE UNTOUCHABLES. THAT'S IT! Thanks, Clore...that was the one I had in the back of my mind and wanted to post about, but couldn't remember what it was.

For pete's sake...pick up your remote and CHANGE the channel if you don't want to see a certain movie again. This gets tiresome with the periodic complaints about "movies that get repeated/shown too often". It's already been explained several times in other threads that TCM's contract to show a movie requires them to run a movie a certain number of times within a certain period. If you don't like it...CHANGE the channel! ]

> {quote:title=filmlover wrote:}{quote}And another problem is that by colorizing, it decreases the sharpness of the picture. That's because colorizing is simply adding another layer onto the image.

In Blake Edwards' *S.O.B.* (1981), Richard Mulligan's corpse is stolen by his buddies (William Holden, Robert Weber, and Robert Preston), who do something similar before giving the body a "viking funeral"...sending it off into the ocean on a flaming raft.

In an extremely offbeat way, the German horror classic NEKROMANTIK has an ambulance driver stealing a corpse, which becomes the third person in a threeway relationship with him and his girlfriend. As far as simply disrespecting a corpse, not necessarily physically mutilating one, CHILDREN SHOULDN'T PLAY WITH DEAD THINGS has the body of "Orville" being removed from its grave, used in an impromptu ceremony to raise the dead, and thereafter being shamed and disrespected...until it actually comes to life and gets revenge.

> {quote:title=TCMfan23 wrote:}{quote}I like both black and white and technicolor(especially 40s and 50s musicals). > > here's 'it's a wonderful life' - BEAUTIFUL ! > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-8pu1chaO0 ...but that is not Technicolor. It's the colorized version. Hardly beautiful...it's a hideous mess of browns and greens.

> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote}No, not resurrecting drive-ins ( although I have no problem with that.) > > Looks like you didn't read the post I'm referring to. Oh well... Whatever... :| I can't possibly read every single post in every thread, you know.