johnm001

At the time DARLING LILI was filming, Julie Andrews was the biggest movie star in the world. Paramount built her an enormous suite of rooms on the lot (as a dressing room!). There was a famous photo taken of the top stars currently making films for Paramount, and they had gathered together, Rock Hudson, Yves Montand, Clint Eastwood, John Wayne, Barbra Streisand and Lee Marvin. Julie Andrews was meant to be in the center of the picture, but Blake Edwards never released her to attend the shoot. All these big stars just stood around, waiting and waiting and waiting. Finally, John Wayne said to studio boss, Robert Evans, "Are you going to furnish chairs while we wait for the queen?" She never showed, so they finally took the photo without her. When Sharon Tate was murdered, Evans loaned Julie Andrews' suite of rooms to Roman Polanski to stay in. The director's cut of DL, is the film as Blake Edwards intended. Paramount kept making him add more Julie, then a scene with kids, because Julie had to be seen with kids, etc. I prefer the longer version, because it's the one that was released, and the one I saw at Radio City Music Hall, so it's hard for me to be objective. When I saw Blake's cut, I felt like they took the film I liked and cut stuff out. I would imagine that if you saw his cut first, then the original release, you would find the additional stuff, unnecessary.

I made no such claim. My only point was that because of colorization, it led to major strides in remastering film. Nothing more. Colorizing CASABLANCA or any black and white film (something I have zero interest in seeing), does not alter the black and white film, in any way. It's always there for those who prefer the original. It just now looks better than it did.

They may have been appealing tot he lowest common denominator, but in doing so, they virtually created the business of remastering films, which had to be done to add the color process to them. We ended up with beautiful-looking b&w copies of films that had, previously, looked horrible.

Is this a film you can watch over and over? You found nothing wrong with the editing or pacing of this film? I agree that it is beautiful.

I love everything about this film. Re-watched it about a month ago and was, once again, mesmerized by it. I have no issue with its ending. It's my favorite film by him, and I like all his films (I did not see the avatar one, whatever it was called).

Every Martin Scosese film I ever saw, requires far better editing. THE AGE OF INNOCENCE is no exception. I do like all the shots of my hometown, Philadelphia, subbing for a New York that no longer exists.

I cannot speak definitively, because like all film adaptations of Lerner & Loewe musicals, I hate BRIGADOON, but neither Jeff nor Tommy should ever be in tartan clothing. They are the outsiders.

Why? I only ask, because I hate Sondheim's shows (except the original production of FOLLIES), so is it a must watch if you are a Sondheim fan, or musicals in general?

TORA! TORA! TORA! THE AMERICANIZATION OF EMILY AWAY ALL BOATS THE GREAT ESCAPE THE DIRTY DOZEN

It's rarely, if ever seen, these days. I love it.

Except TORN CURTAIN has all the Hollywood sheen for which Hitchcock was known. He had the two biggest stars in the world, and there was certainly nothing "ugly" about Paul Newman; but I get what you mean. I suppose that moment in TC was a precursor to his really crossing the line (and getting an R rating), in FRENZY. He always stated that his intent with that scene was to show just how difficult it is to kill someone, because films always make it seem so easy. He certainly succeeds.

Forgot all about it, but I agree!

I can completely agree with these two. THE GRADUATE has zero to recommend it, other than Anne Bancroft's performance, which actually holds up. THE WAY WE WERE is as god-awful as its theme song!

No. There was a curve added for theatrical release in Cinerama-equipped theaters. Back when it came out, we referred to it as "fake Cinerama". They weren't kidding any of us, who actually experienced real Cinerama.

The most scene by scene beautiful film I ever saw, is THE GREATEST STORY EVER TOLD. Greatly diminished on home video, compared to the 70MM release, but still fairly incredible. Virtually every single shot, could double as a painting. I also find THE SOUND OF MUSIC an incredibly beautiful film.

I much preferred the show CARNIVAL, which was based on this story Sadly, they never made a film of it.

Actually, most of that footage resurfaced, years ago, on the laserdisc edition. Criterion has a couple more snippets, and the audio police calls heard during the Intermission. Overall, the $10.00 Wal-Mart exclusive is the best representation of the film, imo.

Just watched SUSPIRIA, for about the 25th time, last night. My wife was 8 1/2 months pregnant with our first son, when we went to see SUSPIRIA in September 1977. The opening was so loud and intense, she claimed she was sure it was going to induce labor! It's certainly in a class by itself.

I do know that Kelly punched out director, Charles Vidor, so perhaps he just didn't like working on the picture? Not a big Kelly fan, so I can't tell when he's sour, or not. I've read he had a great time with Hayworth and Silvers, though.

My soundtrack LP, then CD has gotten a lot play over the years.

Not a fan of any version of LOST HORIZON, including the novel. The remake does have a really great Bacharach/David score. Only problem is, it's the wrong score for the piece. It's a story that requires a Lerner & Loewe-type score, not one with a pop sensibility. Still, even wrong, the score is the best thing about it. The other way the remake suffers, is from some really horrid "choreography" from Hermes Pan. Just the worst, ever, in a motion picture, imo.

My all-time favorite episode of MST3K is the one where Pearl is having a fair, in a plot to take over the universe and they show the short, A CASE OF SPRING FEVER and the feature, SQUIRM. Virtually every line, during the 2 films, the breaks in between, etc., are funny. Best moment is when they wish there was no more Mike and the "Mike Sprite" keeps trying to get the robots to regret their decision and beg for him to be returned.

FRENZY, along with THE PARADINE CASE, UNDER CAPRICORN and VERTIGO are the only Hitchcok films I don't like. FRENZY is an ugly film, to me. Not so much because of its subject matter, but because it lacks anything attractive. The cast, the settings, the entire look is plain, drab or downright ugly. So, add that to ugly subject matter, and it just never plays like a Hitchcock film, to me. It lacks the Hitchock sheen. I've tried, ever since its release to like it, but I just don't.

Definitely a fan. When THE MAN WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALANCE was playing in theaters, I practically moved in. I couldn't get enough of it. i already loved RIO BRAVO, then came a whole slew of movies with John Wayne in theaters to enjoy. I eventually saw his older films, and I like pretty much all of them. VALANCE remains my favorite western, of all time.

Pretty sure TITANIC didn't make the top money-makers list because most people didn't like it. It is an enormously popular film. I didn't care much for it, until I saw it in 3D. It plays far better in 3D than it does in 2D.