Bethluvsfilms
-
Posts
4,734 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Bethluvsfilms
-
-
2 hours ago, TopBilled said:
Have you seen these classics?
1591.
1592.
1593.
1594.
1595.
1596.
1597.
1598.
1599.
1600.
Out of all of these 1591, 1596 and 1600 are the top pics of this bunch IMO.
1599 is watchable only for the chemistry between Jack Lemmon and Walther Matthau (though not one of their better on-screen pairings, I must say).
1598 is no favorite of mine but then I've never been a Bruce Lee fan.
-
1
-
-
SPRING REUNION
-
11 hours ago, speedracer5 said:
Shampoo (1975)
I recorded this film during Goldie Hawn's SUTS day. I'd heard about this film and have never seen it. I was also fascinated by the photos of Warren Beatty's hair that I'd seen on posters and movie covers from this film. This film is also on Criterion and I wanted to see if I needed to add this to my collection.
I do not.
This film was okay. I watched it intently, from start to finish. It had its moments. Supposedly it was a comedy. I didn't laugh at all, except at Warren Beatty's hair, his scarves, and his post-makeover on Julie Christie. In this film, Beatty plays George Roundy, a successful hairdresser in fancy pants Beverly Hills. His clients are all rich women who do nothing but lament to him how much they dislike their husbands. It is obvious that his career is the perfect platform for hooking up with rich, lonely women. In fact, the film opens with George having sex with one of his clients, a lonely married woman, Felicia (Lee Grant). He then gets a call from his girlfriend (!), Jill (Goldie Hawn), who is lonely and wants George to come over. So here is George, the casanova of Beverly Hills, having sex with his mistress and TAKES A CALL FROM HIS GIRLFRIEND during the middle of his rendezvous. Then he leaves his mistress to see his girlfriend. What a player.
That's only the beginning.
The main plot has George wanting to leave his employer and start his own salon. George doesn't care for how his boss, Norman, wants to nickel and dime the clients, when he performs mediocre haircuts at best. Norman seems to never have any clients and spends his days yelling at George. George on the other hand, has a jam-packed schedule and can't keep up with all his appointments, both inside and outside the office. George has been trying to start his own salon, but first he needs to secure financing. He isn't having any luck until mistress Felicia suggests that he make an appointment with her husband, the wealthy Lester (Jack Warden). George goes to visit Lester, only to learn that Lester also has a mistress. Coincidentally, Lester's mistress, Jackie (Julie Christie), is George's ex-girlfriend! Felicia is unaware of George's connection to Jackie, but seems aware of her husband's extra-marital relationship with Jackie. Felicia is brazen in her affair with George, including one scene where she comes home from errands, finds George in her daughter's (Carrie Fisher) bedroom. It's obvious to Felicia EXACTLY what took place in that room. However, she's undeterred, as she lures George into her room, pulls her panties off, and insists on having sex with him right then and there. She doesn't even bother to take her fur coat or go-go boots off first.
It's obvious in this film that George and Jackie still have a thing for each other and they have sex twice in the film. George and Jackie's feelings for one another fluctuate between lust and anger often throughout the film. At the beginning of the movie, Jackie has a blonde version of Peg Bundy's hair. George then restyles it (and possibly dyes it) into a fluffy severe bob with bangs. I was really hoping that there'd be a scene where Jackie (George's ex-girlfriend) and Felicia (George's mistress) meet and have some type of showdown, because George gave them both the same hairstyle! I was hoping that somehow the identical hairstyles would somehow ruin his cover and the two ladies would realize that he was hooking up with both of them, but alas no. Regardless, Jackie's new hairdo is awful. It is just too wide--it made her look like she had a tiny head and face. I did love her black sequin, backless gown, that was awesome.
The highlight of the film is probably when George attends a party with his date, ex-girlfriend Jackie. George takes Jackie to the party at the behest of Lester, who obviously has to attend the function with his wife and not his mistress. Lester is unaware of George and Jackie's history with one another. Then, Lester and Felicia attend. Felicia, you may recall, is Lester's wife who is sleeping with George. Lester is unaware of his wife's affair. Then, George's girlfriend Jill attends the party, with her date, Johnny. Both Jackie and Felicia are unaware that George has a girlfriend. This messy situation is obviously a disaster and culminates with Jackie loudly announcing that she wants to get some [blank] from George--then precedes to try to get some [blank] from him, under the table.
You'd think a movie in which Warren Beatty plays a man dating his girlfriend, while re-kindling things with an ex-girlfriend, while sleeping with his Mistress (and her daughter!) on the side whose husband is also sleeping with Beatty's ex-girlfriend and who is unaware of Beatty's connection to her sugar daddy's wife, and also whose sugar daddy is unaware of Beatty's history with his mistress and affair with his wife would be right up my alley. The scandal! The drama! But meh.
With the legend behind Beatty's conquests with women, one would think that this film was a biopic. It is not. Supposedly it is based on an amalgamation of different Hollywood-based hairdressers, including Manson victim, Jay Sebring.
I just didn't "get" this film I guess. I didn't find anything particularly interesting about it, except for Beatty's hair and wardrobe. I was fascinated by how short Goldie Hawn's formal dinner dress was. I was confused by Lee Grant's sailor dress. I loved Julie Christie's backless black sequined dress. The three women looked like they were attending three different parties. And what was with the after dinner speaker's weird chanting? I did not care for that at all. I liked some of the scenery and loved Julie Christie's house. But despite the amount of affairs and non-gratuitous sex in this film, it just wasn't interesting. It was just okay. I don't see myself needing to watch this again.
I also don't know why this was on Goldie Hawn's day. This film was much more about Warren Beatty's character than hers, it should have been scheduled on his day.
What this film DID do for me is introduce me to Julie Christie. I don't think I'd ever seen her in a film before prior to this one.
SHAMPOO was never one of my favorite films either. Great cast, could have been an interesting story but really dull execution of it.
And you're right, it's really more Beatty's film than Goldie Hawn's. I am curious why they would put this on during her day, it was really nothing more than a supporting role.
As much as I like Lee Grant, it really wasn't an award-winning performance in my book. But then 1975 was such a mediocre year for women's roles, had it been a stronger year for female parts I doubt she would have been nominated, let alone win.
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, TopBilled said:
Saturday August 15, 2020
Nina Foch's day on TCM
fast company (1953)
escape in the fog (1945)
sombrero (1953)
cry of the werewolf (1944)
the dark past (1948)
scaramouche (1952)
cash mccall (1960)
executive suite (1954)
an american in paris (1951)
my name is julia ross (1945)
illegal (1955)
the undercover man (1949)
i love a mystery (1945)
young man with ideas (1952)CRY OF THE WEREWOLF I am most interested in seeing.
I do like EXECUTIVE SUITE and I LOVE A MYSTERY as well.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Bogie56 said:
Sunday, August 16
Cary Grant
11:45 a.m. His Girl Friday (1940). Marvellous banter between Grant and Rosalind Russell.
Really great film.
I do love the sparring between Grant and Russell.
(SPOILER ALERT):
Though once again Ralph Bellamy gets the shaft when it comes to getting the girl.
-
THROW A SADDLE ON A STAR
-
MR. DISTRICT ATTORNEY
-
SOMETHING FOR THE BOYS
-
Ruth Terry
-
Claire Dodd
-
1
-
-
39 minutes ago, TopBilled said:
Have you seen these classic films:
1581.
1582.
1583.
1584.
1585.
1586.
1587.
1588.
1589.
1590.
1586, 1588 and 1590 are the only ones I recognize.
1586 I like really well. 1588 is watchable thanks to the teaming of Sidney Poitier and James Garner.
1590 is pretty good, but I can't bring myself to watch it anymore, knowing it's Natalie's last film.
At the risk of reviving some old controversy of her death, I'll just say that she left this Earth too soon. I think she still had many worthy performances within her before her unexpected passing.
-
1
-
-
THE DEVIL'S PARTY
-
16 hours ago, KidChaplin said:
1. People say..."Oh, that's not realistic at all. That's so far fetched / would never happen / Oh brother." Isn't Hollywood supposed to make the unbelievable believable?
2. Hollywood takes real historic events and embellishes them or just flat changes things. I mean if Hollywood can make anything happen and there's SO much imagination and magic, why can't they make historical events more interesting? The horrible Jesse James movie, "American Outlaws" leaps to mind.
1. I think most people who can't stand the Golden Age films from Hollywood, go into them with a 21st century mindset, which is a mistake because you can't apply today's movie-making standards to the films of yesteryear where the filmmakers of the 30's and 40's had a different way of thinking when bringing the many classics of those eras onto the screen.
I have a lot of suspension of belief, but I also don't mind some realism. The classic era films appeal to me for their sense of fantasy, comedy and romanticism, but I also don't mind a lot of realism that a lot of modern films from the late 60's, 70's 80's 90's and 2000's go for.
2. I kind of see your point. I hate it when filmmakers take a film and claim it's BASED ON A TRUE STORY and practically fictionalized the whole story (one of my biggest peeves about 1978's MIDNIGHT EXPRESS).
On the other hand I don't have a problem with filmmakers who claim the movie they're making on was inspired, rather than based exactly on, events of a certain type of story (INHERIT THE WIND, for example). Everyone knew that it was based on the Scopes case of the 1920's, but the filmmakers (as well as those who wrote the play) made it clear that INHERIT THE WIND was a fictionalized version of what happened in that case.
-
1
-
-
THE RAVEN (1935)
-
5 hours ago, Bogie56 said:
Saturday, August 15
Nina Foch
10:30 a.m. Cry of the Werewolf (1944).
noon. The Dark Past (1948). With William Holden and Lee J. Cobb.
Been awhile since I saw CRY OF THE WEREWOLF.
Looking forward to THE DARK PAST.
-
17 hours ago, TopBilled said:
Cheat Sheet:
1571. GRANDMA’S BOY (1922) with Harold Lloyd & Anna Townsend.
1572. NO GREATER GLORY (1934) with Frankie Darro & George P. Breakston.
1573. THE UNFAITHFUL (1947) with Lew Ayres, Ann Sheridan & Zachary Scott.
1574. APACHE (1954) with Burt Lancaster & Jean Peters.
1575. FLIGHT FROM ASHIYA (1964) with Yul Brynner, Suzy Parker, George Chakiris & Richard Widmark.
1576. THAT DARN CAT! (1965) with Hayley Mills & friend.
1577. F FOR FAKE (1973) with Orson Welles.
1578. ST. ELMO’S FIRE (1985) with Ally Sheedy, Judd Nelson, Emilio Estevez, Demi Moore, Mare Winningham, Rob Lowe & Andrew McCarthy.
1579. THE ROCK (1996) with Sean Connery & Nicolas Cage.
1580. HANGING UP (2000) with Meg Ryan, Diane Keaton & Lisa Kudrow.
1573 and 1576 are the only ones on here that I can truly say I enjoy very much. Haven't seen 1571.
1578 is merely a film I can watch when there's absolutely nothing else on. 1579 was an action-packed waste of time for me, and 1530, despite the fine cast, was a huge disappointment (even more so considering it was Walter Matthau's final film).
-
1
-
-
On 8/12/2020 at 9:54 PM, TopBilled said:
Thursday August 13, 2020
John Barrymore's day on TCM
dr. jekyll and mr. hyde (1920)
don juan (1926)
when a man loves (1927)
state's attorney (1932)
rasputin and the empress (1932)
night flight (1933)
bulldog drummond comes back (1937)
maytime (1937)
grand hotel (1932)
dinner at eight (1933)
night club scandal (1937)
arsene lupin (1932)
svengali (1931)
the great man votes (1939)Really enjoyed all of these..
Especially loved his rendition of DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE.
-
1
-
-
I agree, John was one of those rare actors who could excel in any film genre. He truly was one of the greats.
-
2
-
1
-
-
Joan Taylor
-
Ann Blyth
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, TopBilled said:
Wednesday August 12, 2020
Lana Turner's day on TCM
love finds andy hardy (1938)
cass timberlane (1947)
a life of her own (1950)
the merry widow (1952)
betrayed (1954)
the bad and the beautiful (1952)
bachelor in paradise (1961)
peyton place (1957)
madame x (1966)
the postman always rings twice (1946)
latin lovers (1953)
two girls on broadway (1940)THE BAD AND THE BEAUTIFUL and THE POSTMAN ALWAYS RINGS TWICE are the only two where I felt her acting ability really shined through. Still, at the urging of others, maybe I'll catch PEYTON PLACE, a movie I was very much lukewarm towards once upon a time, and see if I'll change my view.
-
1
-
-
Evelyn Varden
-
7 hours ago, Bogie56 said:
Thursday, August 13
John Barrymore
7:15 a.m. Don Juan (1926). Start the day with a swashbuckler.
Looking forward to seeing this one, I think it's one of John's films I haven't seen as of yet. Be interesting to compare him with Errol Flynn's version in ADVENTURES OF DON JUAN.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, TopBilled said:
Have you seen these classics:
1561.
1562.
1563.
1564.
1565.
1566.
1567.
1568.
1569.
1570.
Without a doubt 1570 is my absolute number one favorite of the bunch.
1568 was a stinker, at least it was for me, despite the cast in it. I like 1564 and 1566 real well.
1562 was pretty good, though I wouldn't call it great. 1563 and 1569 were okay as well.
The rest I don't think I've seen.
-
1
-
Actor/Movie Association Game
in Games and Trivia
Posted
Moroni Olsen