johnm001

I also think that the holiday weekend weather, on most of the east coast, was spectacularly beautiful, and many people just decided to be outside. I would assume the east coast accounts for an enormous portion of the box-office.

I saw so many films during their original run, in theaters. However, the first two I actually recall seeing during their initial releases are LADY AND THE TRAMP and ABBOTT AND COSTELLO MEET THE MUMMY, so I assume, without actually looking them up, they were released in the same year.

It's the only motion picture with an outer space setting that I like.

Yes, I have seen it, and I agree.

His accent never bothered me. He gives my favorite performance by an actor in any film from 1964. Yes, he does!

The first three are fine. After that, ewww!

I've been waiting for that apology for 6 years!!!! Ha! Wow, what a remarkable thing to see on a message board. Of course, no apology was necessary, but I appreciate it, nonetheless. Thanks!!!

I don't understand this question. Are you asking which is better, a film in its native language or one dubbed in English? Or, are you asking which is better, an American film or a foreign film? The first answer is, movies are always better in their native language, undubbed. The second answer is, it depends on the film.

Totally skip August 1st.

Meh...

For some reason (because I am old and my mind keeps all this trivial stuff and throws out the important stuff), I am reminded of when Connie Steves co-hosted the Mike Douglas Show. They did a couple of "Candid Camera-like" segments with her, where she played different types of women in situations where she encountered people on the street, and she was really great in every one of those. I remember being so impressed by her. I also recall a TV movie she did (because an old friend of mine was in it), where she was a fraternity house-mother, that I enjoyed. I remember nothing about it, other than she sang "Cone On-A My House" over the credits. The title might have been "Call Me Mom", I need to look it up.

It may not have had an official release, but I saw THE PICASSO SUMMER in 1970, in a Center City Philadelphia theater.

Easily in the top 5 3D Blu-ray releases. The 3D is superb! I think HOUSE OF WAX is the the 3D Blu-ray release against which all others should be judged; but, my brother thinks it's CREATURE.

I've never seen any similiarities between the two. Connie Stevens, to me, is sort of a cross between Debbie Reynolds and Joey Heatherton. Sandra Dee is completely unique. No one like her, at all, imo.

Exactly my experience with him. He was never boastful. Always wanting to know about you and yours. Such a wonderful person.

I, recently, watch a beautiful HD Blu-ray of that film. I hadn't seen it since it was in theaters! My favorite of his films is THE LINE-UP.

I doubt it. One was a big movie star, and the other was, mostly, a television star. I always felt that Connie Steves was way underrated and underutilized. I think she is a fine actress. Dee, on the other hand, is cute and perky, with limited ability. Not bad, just limited.

That's BLOW UP.

This is very sad news to me. I knew he and Anne Jackson, briefly, and they were sweet and kind. What a talent and a genuinely nice man.

I find KISMET, infinitely better than SHOW BOAT. It looks and sounds magnificent on Blu.

I wasn't referring to the volume. Yes, turning it up fixes the volume, I was referring to the dynamics of the soundtrack. Not great. How can you not know about the scene following the Ent'acte? At the end of Act I, Laurey has had a dream and it is dusk. Judd wakes her to tell her it's time to go to the social. After Intermission is the exact same evening. They are heading to the social. Except, on the Blu-ray, it has, magically, become high noon, and no longer dusk. I got a copy of a Blu-ray, using the same image, with the dusk scene fixed, and the PCM (and superior) laserdisc soundtrack added as an option. Something Fox should have done!

I half agree with this. Even before we had these channels, if TCM or AMC (when they were a movie channel) were not showing a film I wanted to see (regardless of the era), I still didn't watch it. Same with Me, Get, MOVIES, whatever. I only watch (record) when they're showing something I want to see. My biggest issue with TCM, is that FIOS does not carry the HD channel, so in many cases, MOVIES picture quality is superior. If TCM is showing a widescreen film, I need to zoon in on the image to fill the width of my screen. MOVIES, show widescreen films, mostly, at 16 x 9, so they're doing a bit of cropping on some of their titles, but the quality of the image is better, regardless of the aspect ratio. I prefer to watch a film on MOVIES over TCM, but that has more to do with my provider than the station itself.

I agree. I am more interested in these channels for their television shows, than their films. There is an over-the-air commercial channel called MOVIES, which I quite like. If they are showing something that interests me, then I TiVo it, and zip past the commercials, when I watch it.

MY FAIR LADY is essentially, a bad film. It takes this monumental stage musical (and I saw the original London production and it was, indeed monumental), and even in 70MM, turns it into this staid, dull-as-dishwater, almost dreary period piece. Sans great choreography (the stage play's "Get Me to the Church on Time" was an incredible dance number, with superb music, cut from the film), magnificent sets that looked real (the film has big sets that look like sets), and a leading lady that had audiences on their feet at her triumpant "The Rain in Spain" and "I Could Have Danced All Night" (there were three standing ovations during the perform, in a time when they were a rarity). While I think Audrey Hepburn is absolutely dire in the role of Eliza, I don't entirely blame her. The direction of the entire thing is wretched. When I saw the film, I mourned for the loss of what Moss Hart had given us, and what it had become with George Cukor. It is my number 1 least favorite film, ever made. Mostly, because the source material was so spectacular, innovative. The complete opposite of what the film is. MFL was a popular film, because it was a popular title. The original Broadway cast recording was the biggest-selling album (any genre) of all-time. Even if you had not seen the show, you knew it and you had the record. However, Jack Warner predicted that it would be the most successful film of all-time (like the show was), and it wasn't even the most successful film of 1964! He was wrong about the leading lady, the director, and the production, in general; and, while he turned a profit, it was nowhere near the profits of MARY POPPINS or A HARD DAY'S NIGHT or GOLDFINGER.

I never subscribed to the term, "guilty pleasure". I know what it's supposed to mean, but it has an air of smugness about it, that bothers me. One persons "guilty pleasure" is another's "favorite film". It's the same issue I take at the AFI making lists of best this and that. There is no best drama, or best musical, or best anything. It's all subjective, and the idea that people believe they have the authority to declare a film best, is stupid to me. Therefore, declaring something a guilty pleasure (as in, this movie really isn't very good, but I like it), is also stupid to me. If you like it, you like it. Why should anyone feel guilty about what they like? I never got the notion of just because someone with a platform to do so, says something is good or great or bad, it becomes accepted as such. For example, I don't care how many people want to claim that SINGIN' IN THE RAIN is the best movie musical. To me, it's not even in the top 10, and I like the movie. No one would ever called it a guilty pleasure, but I can list as many things wrong with it, as I can, QUEEN BEE (perhaps more!) Or take a newer film like HUGO. Again, it wouldn't fall into what people today call guilty pleasures, but why not? Because someone told us how great it is? It's a really fine film, but again, I can make a list of things that are either silly, repetitive or just stupid about the film. Very few films exist that I can't find something that could be better about them; but my list of perfect films certainly wouldn't be your list, and that's the point. The people at AFI know no more about what makes a great film than you or I. They have opinions, just like we do. I can back up my opinion just like they can. It's still just my opinion. If I say, SINGIN' IN THE RAIN stops dead in its tracks with that plot-stopping Gene Kelly vanity ballet, someone else will say, it's the highlight of the film. I know this is a bit overboard for the thread, but it's just a pet peeve of mine, and I wanted to get it off my chest. Back to listing your guilty pleasures.