lzcutter

I would like to suggest to everybody reading this thread that they take some time to research some FACTUAL reviews of these Sundance films before we have some mob-minded drum-beating going on here. Perspective, context, and the inclusion of ALL relevant facts should be of paramount importance here; my Uncle Hollis liked to remark that opinions are like laundry: everybody's got some, and sometimes, it don't smell too good! Also, I seem to recall some past threads begun by this Board member that were smoke screens for some pretty flagrant right-wing grenade throwing.>> Klondike, Thank you! On a more fanciful note, when you and "Buffalo Gal" (Dean M. Finnie) return from dogsledding the great white North, please apply for a job at the Cinema College. We need folks like you on staff!

> I would look forward to Garfield being Star of the > Month on TCM. That would be a real treat. Me too! =D >> Wasn't John Garfield a Star of the Month last Spring and included the documentary by his daughter?

Is it possible that the most seemingly innocuous document can hold a treasured bit of information for the scholar researching, for example, Yul Brynner?>> Yes, most definitely. The wording of the contract, the year, etc can tell us a great deal about where Brynner fit in the food chain of Hollywood and Fox. << I hope that Twentieth Century Fox is at least scanning copies of the paper ephemera that they're selling and keeping a catalogue of this.>> I'm hoping but not holding my breath. <> We can always drown our sorrows together. < > Probably can't afford anything at auction but might be able to offer a studio tour. Would that work?

The first time I saw "Written on the Wind" I had the same opinion of most people here. It's really a film that requires repeated viewings. It also helps to go into this film knowing it's a satire--not a soap opera. It's also quite a funny film and the straight playing of the characters is intended to generate that humor. Sirk has the phoney backdrops and fake rear projection to show us the plasticized fake world these people live in. Hitchcock used a similar idea with Marnie (1964). There is an extensive use of color. For instance, Robert Stack's sports car is yellow implicating the cowardliness of his character. Dorthy Malone's dresses also have implications. Sirk also works a great deal with mirrors. Next time you see this film, check out the use of mirrors and how things are framed within them. One example would be Robert stack looking at himself in the mirror and then pouring booze directly onto the glass. There are a lot of hidden jokes and other things in this film. Although it's not for everyone I do think it's a film that SHOULD be seen (more than once).>> You hit the nail on the head, Arkadin! Essential films are different from classic films. I think Essential films are not always obvious as to why they are essential. One of the best threads we had a few years ago was why "Ft Apache" was an essential.

The tent calls to the nomad in us all, all the kids and former kids who ever wanted to run away and join the circus; it towers over us and returns us to that childhood, if only for a couple of hours. In an arena, everything's postage-stamp size, a mile away, the floor's thick with cellophane hot dog wrappers, and the experience is a cold and calcualted as a trip to Disneyland (if not quite as expensive).>> Damn CSJ, Your post makes me want to run and away and join the circus if only it was still the way it was when we were young. I have a rocking chair handy if you need one ( ) and we're probably neighbors.

WoW! JackB, I had no idea about the difference between the stage version and the movie version of Carousel. Next time I watch the movie it will be with new eyes. Thanks so much!

Anne and Filmflub, Nick Clooney was the anchor on our local Channel 4 News (NBC) back in the mid-1980s. He was great as the anchor and Mr Cutter still talks about what a stand up guy he was to work with. The only other news guy Mr C holds in that regard (and he worked with some of the big ones at NBC) is Keith Morrison. How I wish I had known Mr Cutter when he was working with Nick Clooney. sigh

"It's like King Tut's tomb," says Rothman. "These are cultural records. It's a shame to keep them in a dark box." >> And it's a shame to let them fall into the hands of private collectors or become ebay fodder when Fox could have donated the entire lot to the Motion Picture Academy Library or UCLA where these studio records and ephemera would be available to the public, scholars and authors for years and years to come. I would hope that the people who win would ultimately donate their winning items to those libraries but I fear that the majority of the auction will end up on ebay and be lost to history forever. As for it being a fundraiser, Fox could have just made a sizeable donation to the Fund and donated the archive to one of the libraries.

I find her heartbreaking in the scene with Slim Pickens down by the river in "Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid".

Pretty interesting especially now that he has THE GOOD GERMAN out right now. Could Clooney be our best hope in keeping the older style of film making and storytelling alive?>> I know many will disagree with me on this but I like George Clooney. He is a good actor and he while he makes films like the "Oceans" sequels he does that so he can then help finance and help find financing for films like "Syrania", "Good Night and Good Luck" and "The Good German". He has an understanding of film history and he knows who Preston Sturges and Howard Hawks are. I'm not surprised he does, he is well read and his aunt was Rosemary Clooney and his uncle Mel Ferrer (or was it Jose, I get confused). But so often here on this board we complain that the stars today have no clue about the actors and filmmakers of the studio era and here is one that not only does but tries to emulate them. I like George Clooney.

BTW, if R. Reagan can have his own box set why can't someone put together a good JG set?!>> Warner Bros may be holding off on it until they can include "The Sea Wolf". They are currently scouring archives around the globe for the missing scenes from the film. They are hoping to find them so that they can restore the film to the way it was when it premiered. Some time (I don't know if it was shortly or what), after the premiere, the negative was recut and scenes were deleted. (I don't know exactly what scenes, if anyone is interested shearerchic may know or you might be able to find more info by googling.)

I was surprised to see that Borat received the best adapted screenplay. Is this because the concept was adapted from his television show?>> Jack, That and the fact the film has something like four screenwriters credited. There was an article in yesterday's LATimes about how much of Borat is actually scripted. Sshhh! Don't tell anyone.

Larry, I think the horse race this year may be between Forrest Whitaker and Peter O'Toole. Love that Ennio is finally getting an Oscar!

(Still not getting why some of you are SO sensitive to any constructive criticism or suggestions for improvement. This isn't a fascist regime where you're shot for it?)>> Otterhere, The rub may come from those who have been posting here for a few years. It's the thread that will not die. People have been debating and arguing about it as far back as 2000 and possibly since the inception of the Message Board. Also, we spent more than the half of last year arguing about this. Now Playing Guides were found and posters took the time to pour over the copies and post the stats. The Wayback Machine was fired up so that people could read the old schedules on line. And still we argued on. It is now 2007 and we are still debating and arguing about it and still going in circles. On a side note about this type of thread, too often the arguing gets very personal and very nasty and, ultimately, turns too many folks away from posting here again.

JackBurley, I'm betting Helen Mirren for Best Actress but Best Actor is a little tougher. Will the Academy go for Peter O'Toole or Forrest Whitaker? Could go either way right now. Eddie Murphy has the buzz right now for "Dreamgirls" for Best Supporting Actor, as does Jennifer Hudson for Best Supporting Actress. Will be interesting to see how closely the actual nominees mirror your choices. The only long shot on your list may be Jack Earle Haley, if only because the members may not have seen the film. Waiting, waiting, waiting..... Message was edited by: lzcutter because I didn't see the word actual in JB's original post!

Larry, I was reading the review today for the play "Legends" starring Linda Evans and Joan Collins. The reviewer said that it originally starred Mary Martin and Carol Channing. They did not get along at all and the whole experience was so incredibly over the top the play never made to Broadway and the author of the play wrote a book based on the experience and to set the record straight about all the gossip that was going around about these two actresses that did not get along. Any inside scoop?

Michael, Those of us in Hollywood and the surrounding 'burbs would be interested in hearing your take on your hometown.

Markus, There is a really good bio on LB Mayer called "The Lion of Hollywood" by Scott Eyman. I, too, had heard the "bad" Mayer stories all these years. Garland, I think, exaggerated many of her stories for effect. The woman had a wicked sense of humor and great comedic timing and in watching her in interview footage Mayer is often the bad guy. Anyways, it's a good book and I recommend it because it gives a view of LB that doesn't fit with the overall bad studio dictator that Garland's stories portray.

I'm not sure how these stars who were children when picked up and polished, tossed into that studio system, were able to survive with any sanity remaining intact. Most of them didn't, did they?>> Actually, I think most of them did. Jane Powell, Ann Miller, Katherine Grayson, Carelton Carpenter, Debbie Reynolds and while Mickey Rooney and Liz Taylor may be bad at picking spouses for the most part, the generation of young actors that went through MGM with Judy fared much better emotionally than Judy.

Try to watch vintage movies with the mindset of the audiences who watched them in their first runs, and you may come away with a different perspective of the story itself.>> Anne, Clapping, clapping, clapping, clapping! Excellent post!!!!

Oldmoviebuff, TCM has recently had great success with obtaining contracts with Sony, Universal and Paramount (their post-1950s catalogue) to broadcast a number of films. There have been a number of threads the last few months with folks thanking TCM for running films that they have requested so it may be with these new contracts in place that the films you are requesting may in fact be coming to TCM. I certainly hope so.

I've made tons of requests for classic movie stars' movies to no avail. Still no Louise Brooks, Clara Bow, Vivien Leigh,>> Sweetbaby, As long as IFC has the contract for broadcasting Pandora's Box it probably prevents TCM from running it. Clara Bow did most of her work for Paramount (I believe) and they are notorious for not taking care of their studio library (especially their silents) except for the very well known titles. As for Vivien Leigh, most of her early work was done over in England and from the looks of TCM's recent negotiations and screenings of older British titles, it may be that Vivien Leigh will highlighted in this summer's SUTS. We can keep our fingers crossed.

One that I've requested several time ("Goodbye, Again"; I can't recall the French name now, although it's not a foreign film) WAS shown on TCM, so I know it's not a matter of them not having it/being able to get it; but "The Producers" is better? >> Otterhere, It looks like "Goodbye Again" with Ingrid Bergman and Yves Montand, was released by United Artists but it also looks like there is a Belgium company involved for the European release. It may be that another channel has the rights or it may have something to do with European contract that is preventing TCM from showing it soon.

So last night was my return to the series. And I left the movie thinking I'd just seen the best Bond movie ever. Daniel Craig is excellent and he has the balance of brawn and sophistication that the role requires.>> Jack, I wholeheartedly concur. Anne, when this movie comes to cable, give it a chance. I think you will like it. This is how an agent named Bond becomes James Bond and it is great. I said in another thread it is a Bond for the 21st Century but with his roots very much in the 20th Century. Loved Jeffrey Wright as Felix! Praying he comes back for the next one and has more to do. Loved the villians. Jack, The villain being chased at the top of the movie- his stunt work is credited in the opening credits. Loved it, loved it, loved it.

Casino Royale! They have reinvented the Bond Franchise. Don't get me wrong, I really liked Pierce Brosnan. But the Bond films of late to me have become caricatures of themselves. This film takes Bond back to the basics without all the gizmos and without all the silliness. Has some good laugh out loud moments but is very edge of your seat. Great stunts, though like all Bond films, one that goes on a tad too long. But Daniel Craig makes a great Bond and this is the story of how an agent named Bond became James Bond. I don't miss Q (though I love the character) and Judi Dench is wonderful as M. A Bond for the 21st Century but his roots are very 20th Century. Loved it!