hlywdkjk

Minya, Movieman & "joe" - Sounds like *Cat Women Of The Moon* is a hit. That's great because until 'joe' mentioned the film yesterday, I didn't know what I was going to post for Friday. I've been focusing on the planning for an extended set of images for Memorial Day. (Beginning this Tuesday, I think.) And, believe it or not, I actually had that image already on my hard drive. I didn't go out into the web and search it out. (I think I was planning on using it in the upcoming October with plans to feature more off-beat horror films this year.) I, too. laughed at "love starved Cat Women". But should I know who Sonny Tufts is? I am familiar with the other "stars" but not him. Kyle In Hollywood

Friday May 16^th^ *"Are you sure thats not the poster for "Cat Women on the Moon" "* - joefilmone Uuuhh....nope. Don't think so.

*"Can AMC and TCM play the same movie and the same time?"* It might be possible now that AMC is a commercial-supported cable channel. I have assumed that "exclusivity" is (often) awarded only to a channel so that it is kept off channels that directly compete with the lessee. I think the "competition" for film leases breaks down as as "pay cable" / "subscription" channels (and that includes TCM), commercial supported cable channels (AMC and TNT, for example) and then broadcast network channels (ABC or NBC) followed by local broadcast channels. I may be wrong but if channels aren't direct competitors in terms of format that a film _could_ be sold to more than one outlet. I thnk of *The Wizard Of Oz*. In recent years, the film pops up on TCM, on TNT (I know. It's still a Turner channel) and also on local broadcast channels. But I also think CSjr is right that "exclusivity" comes at a premium and that some channels may choose not to pay extra for the "exclusive rights" to a film. I am sure when TCM had the rights to show the *The Lord Of The Rings* last February, it wasn't the only channel showing the film that month. And it might not have been the only "pay channel" able to show it. Kyle In Hollywood

Thursday May 15^th^ "Journey Into Fear" Thanks to "BackAlleyNoir"

*"So what about Vermont?"* Welcome to Mandrake Falls Where the Scenery Enthralls Where No Hardship E'er Befalls Welcome To Mandrake Falls - Longfellow Deeds (author) In that same vein - *Nothing Sacred* http://www.tcm.com/tcmdb/title.jsp?stid=5725 Newspaper Editor Oliver Stone sends star reporter Wally Cook to Warsaw, Vermont to interview radium poisoning victim Hazel Flagg, who has been diagnosed as having only six months to live. Kyle In Hollywood

*"I hadn't noticed TCM not showing Fox films, as they do show a lot of the Fox film noirs, no?"* - iowahawkeye 20th Century Fox used to be the least represented major film studio on the TCM schedule. But that hasn't been the case in the past few months. Last fall saw the the debuts of multiple films made by John Ford at Fox Studios. And this Spring brought the TCM premiere of *All About Eve*. Hopefully this development will be ongoing and bring even more Fox films to TCM. But, from my observation, TCM seem to be negotiating for Fox films on a individual title basis. And the titles chosen are usually to help enhance a special event on TCM - the "31 Days of Oscar" or a "Star Of The Month" tribute, for example. But this isn't true for TCM's relationship with other studios. As 'lzcutter' has written, TCM has access to "packages" of films from Paramount, Columbia and even Disney that have been going on for the past year or longer. Plus there is the long-term leasing of the films in the Hal Roach library. Along with "special access" to what was the "Turner Library" of films at Warner Brothers, these libraries make up the bulk of the programming for TCM in any given month. So, to answer your _original_ question, TCM may not have the rights to certain films from some studios today. But it appears that TCM can acquire the broadcast rights to nearly any film if the channel has a good reason for pursuing those rights.(It also helps if the studio has a good digital copy of the film for TCM to lease.) I used to believe that there were certain films that would never be made available to TCM. But after the premiere of *All About Eve* this year, I no longer think that is true. A film may be shown for a single night ( *Easy Living* ), for a few weeks ( *Fall Of The Roman Empire* ) or for a few years. But more than ever before, in the TCM world of movies, _anything is possible_. Kyle In Hollywood

Wednesday May 14^th^

*"Turn the photo over. What you'll see are four knives in my back."* -FrankGrimes I guess that means I better get Hercule Poirot off that train so he can investigate this "Death on a Desert Island". Can they really hide a shiv in those grass skirts? Kyle In Hollywood

In the past, Robert Osborne has stated that it is his considered opinion that *Libeled Lady* should have won the Oscar for Best Picture that year over that other Powell & Loy film - *The Great Ziegfeld*. Can't really argue with that - though I do enjoy them both. Kyle In Hollywood

Tuesday May 13^th^ "Southern Belles" tonight on TCM

butterscotchgreer - How about this? I hope you enjoy being a blonde.

*"Was there ever an admission that the blue noses struck last time?"* - tobitz I believe that TCM did admit it was "S & P" (aka the lawyers acting as censors) that were responsible for the removal of *Zabriske Point* from a recent schedule. Kyle In Hollywood

*"How come no one complained during Dick Cavett Month?"* - Annieandherbananas Oh, they did. It was not a pleasant few days around here when the schedule with those programs first appeared. Kyle In Hollywood

hamradio - The WIN ("Whip Infaltion Now") button is lost for good. I was wearing it for a lark back in the 80s and it fell off the vest it was pinned to. But I still have the "Lindsay '72" button. (Ahh, the idealism of a junior high school student in Wisconsin.) Kyle In Hollywood

Good Morning KennS. ! Thanks for taking the time to register and share your compliments. It is always nice to hear that one appreciates the posters. And I appreciate the feedback too. Kyle In Hollywood

*"Have I mentioned how wonderful you are?"* - Minya Awww, shucks. And anyone else who has some advice for Hollis can help with this choice - *Raintree County* or *Jezebel* ? Kyle In Hollywood

Monday May 12^th^ Minya's Reward. (One of "Bob's Picks" tonight)

*"In another context, The War on Drugs are there comparisions? Is the word 'war' used in the same way as "The War on Terror"?"* - hamradio You mean like the "War On Poverty" (Great Society Initiative)? or "The War On Inflation" (1970s)? The difference isn't only grammatical. "The War On Terror" enlisted and is fought solely by the military. And if a nation is fighting a "war" with the miitary, there sure as hell better be a strategy to "win". And that includes a defeated enemy and a cessation of _military_ operations. If "The War On Terror" isn't to be considered a military operation - and evaluated on those terms - then the military shouldn't have been involved from the get-go. (And I believe there are many "respected" individuals who thought fighting terrorism was best handled outside of the purview of the military.) Kyle (who once owned a "WIN" button) In Hollywood

*"It's "The 39 Steps" both times."* - Minya Thanks Minya. And I am sure FrankGrimes is jumping up and down now too. Anyone else with recommendations for Hollis should keep them coming. Kyle In Hollywood

'mickeeteeze' and 'hamradio' - Am I projecting or is there a hint from BS that the oil cartel and the (near) monopoly of Big Oil also have their hands "dirty" in this situation? Personally, I believe when just four companies control a vital (and "storable") commodity, there is no "competition" hence no reason to engage in price wars that benefit consumers. Glad you enjoyed the article. Kyle In Hollywood

While I admire Frank Sinatra (and my Mother adores him), I can't help but think he owes his career to the "original" crooner". Thanks to the crew at Worth1000.com And why do I look at that photo and immediately think of FrankGrimes surrounded by his posse of Message Board gals. Hmmm. Now which one of his gals is his "Darla"? Kyle In Hollywood

Thanks for the assist Minya. I am sure Hollis will appreciate it. For your reward, I put to you this question - *Keeper Of The Flame* or *The 39 Steps* Kyle In Hollywood

*"Kyle was asking about oil speculation and I gave him 2 links. I will repost them."* - hamradio Funny thing. Today Ben Stein wrote a column in the New York TImes Business section topical to the discussion of oil prices and why they don't behave in the way Econ101 says they're supposed to behave. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/11/business/11every.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&ref=todayspaper&pagewanted=print Seems he is of the mind that the weak dollar AND speculation are the culprits. --------------- *You Can’t Make This Stuff Up, or Can You?* By BEN STEIN *FOR a long time*, I spent my days as an independent producer by morning, a law professor by afternoon and a dog fancier by night. I would hatch ideas for television shows and movies, take them to studios and pitch them and, once in a while, some kindly soul would buy one and, even more rarely, one would be made. My son is just now finishing his first year of college. People ask me what I would like for him to do. I always say, “Whatever the dear boy would like to do.” But in my heart, I would like for him to be a real-life counterpart of a character on my latest imaginary TV series brainchild: “The Hedges of Greenwich, Conn.” (It sounds a bit like “The Bridges of Madison County,” no?) This is my hypothetical series about powerful hedge fund traders and private equity players in Greenwich, whose wealth is so immense that they can live like maharajahs. But far more important, they have so much money — put up by Harvard and Yale endowments, among others, and then magnified by leverage — that they can plunge world markets into turmoil. In my first episode, a cagey old trader and wheeler-dealer who lives in splendor surrounded by his German short-haired pointers and his cats, is about to be visited by his mysterious young mistress. Little does he know, she is about to give him a shot of lead because his private equity fund bought, ripped, stripped and flipped her father’s company in Lima, Ohio, putting her father out of a job and driving her mother to suicide. His son, meanwhile, is plotting to sell short the bonds his father issued, putting his father’s whole empire in jeopardy. You see the many directions in which my febrile brain goes, and all because nice people have asked me why the high price of oil does not act the way that Econ 101 says it should: by suppressing consumption, bringing on new supplies and lowering the price. Here’s why: the Hedges of Greenwich. Look at oil and gasoline and natural gas. They have immense uses as consumer products. They power our cars. They heat our homes and our swimming pools. When their prices rise here in the United States, drivers, homeowners and swimmers cut back on the use of these fuels. *But there is much more* to the story than that. First, the price we pay is denominated in dollars, and as the dollar falls, the price in dollars rises. Buyers who pay in euros or won do not see the same price appreciation because their currencies have been rising against the dollar. Hence, the commodity in question may be higher in dollars — suppressing demand here — but may be barely changed in euros day to day. This is one reason that worldwide demand is not much affected. In fact, demand for some energy sources is softening ever so slightly in the United States, but world demand continues strongly upward. This has little to do with the oil companies — usually called the “big” oil companies to distinguish them from the small oil companies we all have in our backyards. They just float along with the tide, the way we consumers do. They are at the mercy of the traders, as we all are. And consumer prices, when left to themselves, are behaving more or less the way prices are supposed to — rationing supply and adjusting demand. *But there is another* hugely important factor now in world energy markets: the pricing of energy as a speculative item. Traders can and do buy vast amounts of energy futures. Right now, there is a worldwide mania to invest in them. In this situation, when investors and traders are pouring buckets of money into thimbles of energy quanta, to use a phrase from my pal Tobias M. Levkovich, chief United States equity strategist at Citigroup, the price is bid higher and higher. And, as the price goes up, demand does not fall. It rises, because investors and traders think that it will keep rising and they will make money on it in the future. (Oil, gasoline and natural gas can be stored indefinitely.) It’s like the bubble in Miami Beach condominiums. As the price of them soared, traders did not stay away. Instead, they kept buying, anticipating more or less endless gains. Right now, the Hedges of Greenwich are bidding up the prices of hydrocarbons into the stratosphere by buying energy futures. Your switching from a Cadillac to a Prius won’t tilt the balance back to falling energy prices. Your earnest little efforts at conservation mean nothing when compared with the upward push coming from the speculative bubble. And now the big boys have been joined by you and me. Little folks like us can buy our very own energy baskets of exchange-traded funds and the like, and are doing so in big numbers. *Now, the alert reader* will notice two truths at this point: One, bubbles always end, and almost always end badly. So will this one. There is always some supposed reason that “this time is different,” but it never is. Second, the fact that small players are getting into the game is almost always a sign that the end of the bubble is near. This will be good news for us drivers, homeowners and swimmers. But it will be bad news for those who thought that buying baskets of commodities would make them rich. OH, and how will the bubble end? When the crafty old guy with the German short-haired pointers is recovering from his gunshot wounds and wakes up, calls in his associates and says, “Boys, it’s time to sell.” The word flies from the Bentley dealer to the yacht harbor, and, pretty soon, light Brent crude is in full meltdown. But what’s this? Somehow the equally cagey son found out and bought puts — hmm, how did he know? Was the source his father’s seemingly caring nurse? And why does she look so much like the mistress who shot him? Ben Stein is a lawyer, writer, actor and economist. E-mail: ebiz@nytimes.com. ---------------- Kyle In Hollywood

Hello Hollis - I'm glad you made a stop over here. And thanks for the good words about the Gallery. Unfortunately, I am no expert on purchasing Classic Film Posters. I have only collected the digital images. I came across this site recently that might be a good place to start - and use for comparison's sake. http://www.posteritati.com/index.php This is a "retail" site and the items are probably "priced accordingly". But I am sure that some of the regular visitors here could offer you some better advice and guidance. How about it gang? Could those of you who have bought film memorablilia online give my friend Hollis some tips on locating some quality "goods"? Especially if you know of someplace other than Ebay? I'd appreciate it. And I am sure Hollis would too. Kyle In Hollywood

Hello "Annie" Welcome to the community. You'll find lots of folks here that share your appreciation of comedies and "the darker side" (especially "the darker side") so you shouldn't go wanting for discussion. There's lot's to explore in these Forums. Don't forget to check out all the Genre Forums that reside below the Main Forums. Kyle In Hollywood