Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

hlywdkjk

TCM_allow
  • Posts

    8,678
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by hlywdkjk

  1. *"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

  2. 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

  3. *"Now that I've heard it, yes the voiceover does bother me too."* - mr.6666

     

    I saw part of one of the interview/commentary pieces last night for the first time. It included commentary from Nancy Kwan (I believe it was her.) who spoke with a similar "accent" so it made me wonder if she wasn't the one doing the voice-over for the promo.

    If she performed it, then I am "less bothered" by the "sound" of it. But it is still jarring to hear.

     

    Kyle In Hollywood

  4. *"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

  5. '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

  6. While I admire Frank Sinatra (and my Mother adores him), I can't help but think he owes his career to the "original" crooner".

     

    Alfalfaandhisgirls

    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

  7. *"Were you purposely misquoting me ..."* - CineMaven

     

    Not at all. I didn't have an issue with your assessment of Joan Chen. It was only to make your list more similar in style with one found on the website and thus, easier to compare. (and "space" comes into consideration too.)

     

    Plus, the topic of Joan Chen's "beauty" wasn't the reason for my reply nor going to be part of it so I thought removing it would acknowledge that I wasn't intentionally ignoring it. It wasn't because I disagreed with that description.

     

    I am sure she is very attractive.

     

    Kyle

  8. *"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

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. *"It'd be great if we were to see Gong Li, Ziyi Zhang, Michelle Yeoh or Joan Chen, speak on the Asian Image in Films."* -CineMaven

     

    From the online article about the upcoming event -

    http://www.tcm.com/movienews/index/?cid=200106

     

    In addition, several talented people from the world of film, literature and academia will take part in the festival, including filmmaker Wayne Wang, actress Ming Wen, writer Amy Tan, actress Rosalind Chao, actor George Takei, actress France Nuyen, actress Nancy Kwan, actor James Shigeta, actress Miiko Taka, film scholar Elaine Mae Woo, film producer Janet Yang and actress Lauren Tom.

     

    Can't say I am all that familiar with most of these names - the ones you mention or the ones in the article. But that's just something more to look forward to.

     

    Kyle In Hollywood

  12. OK, I'll play -

     

    _Machiavellian_ -

    Burt Lancaster in *Seven Days In May* (having seen the clips recently in the Lancaster promo)

    Anne Baxter in *All About Eve*

     

    _Psychopathic_ -

    Robert Mitchum in *Night Of The Hunter*

    Richard Widmark in *Kiss Of Death* (thanks Cinemaven)

    _Narcissistic_ -

    Andy Griffith in *A Face In The Crowd*

    Vivien Leigh in *Gone With The Wind*

     

    Kyle In Hollywood

     

    Message was edited by: hlywdkjk to correct the Widmark error

  13. *"Kyle, I totally agreed with you about that ad, and had always meant to post on that thread about it. I'd found it incredibly annoying, but never understood why I did until you pointed it out."* - tobitz

     

    Thanks for that. Then I guess I can relax still believing that my dottage hasn't set in yet. I was getting worried there for awhile.

     

    Kyle In Hollywood

  14. *"How about Nashville ?"*

     

    Good one 'scsu1975' - though I prefer to never see it again. Once was enough.

     

    I'll add two -

    *Inherit The Wind*

    http://www.tcm.com/tcmdb/title.jsp?stid=16639

    "The townsmen of Hillsboro, Tennessee, led by Rev. Jeremiah Brown, arrest high school biology teacher Bertram T. Cates for violating a state law that prohibits the teaching of Charles Darwin's theory of evolution."

     

    And one I am not familiar with but would make a point to see -

    *All The Way Home* with Jean Simmons and Robert Preston

    http://www.tcm.com/tcmdb/title.jsp?stid=67096

    "In the early 1900's Tennessee, a loving family undergoes the shock of the father's sudden, accidental death."

     

    Kyle In Hollywood

© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...