Pia
-
Posts
226 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Pia
-
-
'Bahji on the Beach'
nw:Houdini
-
Its great to find someone who saw this tv movie - and not only that, you remember the year, the network and the exact title. Thanks! And blasphemy or no, I am with you 100% on a channel like the one you describe. Actually, when Encore initiated its, 'Action Pack', around the beginning of the century (that sounds WEIRD!) and introduced their genre channels, I jumped for joy at a 24/7 MYSTERY channel - and it didn't disapoint. I no longer have it, having moved, but at that time, this college student was in heavenly bliss watching TV shows like, 'Burkes Law', and 'Ellery Queen', from the 60's, also England's, "Secret Agent', 'The Saint', and 'The Prisoner', also from the 60's. I also remember a very good 90's crime drama from Australia about a forensic psychiatrist called 'Jane Hailfax', and another about a PI (who was so Private, he had a dry-cleaning business as a 'front'), called 'Elvis - and whatever his last name was, I'll have to look it up, sorry!) In addition they showed mystery MOVIES from just about every decade, as I recall, and some wonderfully obscure ones. One in particular was a 1959 British film called, "Homicide", complete with a nice young chap who, quite normally retires to bed one evening in his (gorgeous) mews flat in London - only to awaken next morning on the couch of his country cottage front room. Naturally, he isn't alone, there being a corpse in the house with him - and of course, he has no recollection of any of it! I LOVED that movie, but there were others, too. Gosh, I miss having something like that on my cable system.
Your "Goodnight, My Love', and 'Chicago Deadline' also sound wonderful, too. wouldn't it be great if we all could somehow be able to design and program our own channels?!!
-
I fear that, in an effort to not repeat myself on this topic from the original post/thread I initiated in the 'Mystery' forum, I failed to make clear what I was trying to say re: the relationships between the two "Dahlia" films, as well as to the "Black Dahlia" case itself.
The ONLY way in which I had ever heard the film "The Blue Dahlia", mentioned in relation to the Elizabeth Short case - or at all - was in regard to the origin of the "Black Dahlia' nickname, i.e., that a diner employee on the PCH where Red Manley stopped to eat when Elizabeth travelled along with him for his sales job, had given her the nickname, having seen or heard of the currently showing, 'Blue Dahlia' film, and after being struck by her custom of dressing mostly in black. Now, whether this is the actual etiology of the moniker or not, the name was picked up by the press and it sure stuck. I never heard, or more importantly, meant to infer that there were similarities in plot or in content of any type in any 'Dahlia' film - or the real case itself - to each other
However, I think I was pretty clear in my comparison of the Short case to the Ripper murders, citing them as similar ONLY with regard to widespread and decades-long efforts to solve, savagery of the killings themselves (the savagery was different, true, but at some point its all pretty moot, imo.) and their notoriety..
I am hoping I will be able to watch on Wednesday night, and I will look for Howard da Silva's performance, as you have reccommended. As for the books on the Short case, I have read the Ellroy, and got the DVD for Christmas of the recent film. I also read a book about one woman's "theory" that her own father killed not only Short, but several other women in the Hollywood area, discussing at length documented information about the murders of these women that LAPD was attempting to solve around the same time period. The book is entitled, I think, "Daddy Was the 'Black Dahlia' Killer", and while the title could be improved upon, the book is persuasive. Were it presented as fiction, it would be a VERY interesting read - it is anyway. I can't recall the author's name, however I'd love to see a 'Dualing Daddy's' panel discussion, she against the ex-LA homocide cop who believes HIS father killed the 'Dahlia', and is equally persuasive. Perhaps on Dr. Phil or Oprah?
Message was edited by: Pia to say that my usual 'wink' emoticon doesn't seem to work on this board - the 'smile' works fine, though.
No, it doesn't anymore, either. -
> {quote:title=Capuchin wrote:}{quote}
> (Apologies in advance for any misspellings, grammar errors, etc. -- my dyslexia is running amok.)
>
> My nickel's worth . . .
>
> On the number of posters --
> While certain events (like the Prop 8 thread) seem to have a great effect, the simple truth is that all discussion groups go through periods of growth and decline. I've been tracking Usenet for more than ten years, and its normal for newsgroups with dozens of posters and literally hundreds of posts a day fall to a few people who pop in once in a while, then the group resurrects its past glory, only to fall again . . .
***I've been an active, nearly daily member of a very enjoyable board for some time now (third 'anniversary' is tomorrow!, gosh!) and an occasional poster/lurker on a couple of others, and I have definately found, and not surprisingly, that there are cycles, for sure. Which, if you can just hang in through the low points, make it kind of interesting.
> On the question of newbies --
> Again drawing on my experience with Usenet, the reason most people bother finding a forum is so they can complain about something.
***I realize that you qualified with the word "most", and am certainly inclined to give credence to your span of experience on this issue. I have made a single complaining post on a site or two, for sure, but, to the best of my memory it was simply to protest the cancellation of two recent - and different - network drama show cancellations because I am aware of a few instances in which high numbers of such a response have actually succeeded in reversing a cancellation decision. I do believe in lending one's voice (must be the American in me;)) However I have also certainly been witness to 'hit-and-run' posts of pure complaint, but again, if such declarations are sincere and not merely acts of self-indulgent misuse and/ or abuse, I see no harm..
>That's human nature; when your world is all sweetness and light, you don't go looking for new horizons.
***While I am not sure whether to take this statement wholly literally, I will say that I certainly have felt relative contentment about life on balance - and STILL felt a need to do exactly that. As I get older, I find that I am becoming interested in more and more subjects, perhaps having finally burst the walls of that comfortable, 'I-know-just-what-I-want-to-do bubble of post adolescence and post undergraduate years, and become somewhat career-stable, I am just starting to see that there is a 'whole bunch' of 'other stuff' out there!
> When an unhappy person doesn't find either sympathetic ears or are confronted with the stark fact that rants don't change the world, they grow disillusioned and move on. That's typical of all discussion groups.
***True. But "rants" - honest or heartfelt from one or more persons in any given forum can also effect a 'breakthrough' of sorts and actually open floodgates, that perhaps few realized were even there. And if communication is the result, perhaps a rant - a word which does have a negative connotation - isn't always a negative thing. Maybe one person's rant is actually another person's heartfelt concern, which, when expressed honestly, possibly can lead to increased communication, and further understanding between folks who really do have mutual respect.
> There is a member who I generally skip over, because they're a nitpicker and don't acknowledge or apologize when their nit is grossly wrong, but they have posted an insightful piece, and I don't want to miss their next brainwave.
lol. I like that.
> One thing I do know: hand-wringing about the imminent death of the board is counterproductive. Rather than wasting time on that, think of something interesting to talk about.
Agreed!
-
Well, that was the thing - I had heard of it only as it was mentioned in relation to "The Black Dahlia" case, and thinking I had heard it described as a 'crime/mystery' somewhere. But I also posted about something else related to the case - a tv mini-series or movie my aunt remembers being made in the 70's sometime, starring, inexplicably, Luci Arnaz as Elizabeth Short, for which I was also seeking information and/or anyone who recalled seeing it.
This case has always struck me as the US version of England's "Jack the Ripper' murders, in terms of the comperable infamy and savagery of the crimes themselves - but ultimately it is the undeniable allure of the sheer mystery, the 'WHO'? I assume that many of the world's most brilliant ctiminal minds of their times have given thorough attention to each of these cases over the years, apparently to little avail in both instances (although crime writer Patricia Cornwell avidly studied the 'Ripper' case for several years and feels that she has finally answered THAT question, presenting quite persuasive evidence in her non-fiction book about it - the EXACT title of which alludes me at the moment, although I believe it does contain the word, "Solved")
Obviously not all mysterys are noirs, but I am so enamored of mysterys, to wit, murder mysterys, that I'll watch even the ones with very obvious comedic bents, such as the Topper film, where murder victim Joan Blondell, I think it is, returns in ghostly form to prevail upon poor Topper to avenge her death, as well as the Red Skelton radio mystery guy films! Lovely, lovely noirs are my next favorite and I how I do love when both genres combine!
'
-
Aha! I figured it had to be something pretty simple like that - I am always looking for the 'fancy' solution!
Yeh, I did end up doing that, cause when I went in to do the 'edit' I saw that my original was all there, so I did away with the paragraoh line separation and it all posted just fine - although I am still a mite confused, as other times I had no trouble with it at all.
Thank you for the explanation - I will keep 'practising'!
-
> {quote:title=scsu1975 wrote:}{quote}
> > {quote:title=Pia wrote:}{quote}
> > Great! Thank you, scsu!
> >
> > Pia,
> > aka ccsu!
>
> You're welcome, even if you went to ccsu.
back atcha. (But I think we graduated some years apart, although possibly that won't serve to redeem me!) -
Perhaps each of us is misunderstanding the other. I only meant that, compared to me (or anyone with the same duration of 'membership'),your posting frequency/amount semed to indicate that you have enjoyed an ongoing presence here, thats all.
I didn't necessarliy think that you were inferring that I was the 'complaining annual poster', which I thoght I did make clear. INSERTION DURING EDIT: Once again, my post as I originally typed it, was inexplicably truncated - an entire paragraph was deleted, and I wish it hadn't been. I have it here, and will move the paragraph in question up, so that there will be no spaces, perhaps then it will post in it's entirety. Here goes.END OF EDIT.
By nature, I am not a 'fighter': I noted something that bothered me, posted about it, and I have deep respect for the responses to my thoughts that I have read here, both 'for'. and 'agin. ' But now I would much rather spend time reading what others are feeling and saying, about other things classic fil-related.. I am sorry to hear about folks who may be less than tolerant about what they deem as 'questionable' moral conduct contained in certain films, and who may have caused others to feel personally maligned. However now I only wish to be able to exchange thoughts about films, et al, and spend some enjoyable time. around these forums, as time permits.
Thanks for explaining about the 'quotes' thing. I'll try your method as well as scsu's and see which is best for me. I appreciate your respectful reply.
Pia
Message was edited by: Pia
-
> {quote:title=scsu1975 wrote:}{quote}
> > {quote:title=patful wrote:}{quote}
> > And if you want to quote someone, left-click and highlight on the text and copy, then paste it in your message. You can make the text bold by highlighting it again in your message and clicking the "B" in the toolbar above.
>
> Or click on the " symbol, like I just did.
Great! Thank you, scsu!
Pia,
aka ccsu!
-
Wow, I made a thread about this film in the Mystery forum, asking if anyone had seen it, or anything about it at all. Awesome! I can't wait to watch it, I;m so glad I happened over here, thanks!
-
I think that just may be the most good-natured, positive and constructive difference of opinion I have ever seen! Welcome, carusosoldies
-
Film Fatale, I would just first like to say that I have enjoyed reading your posts all along (and they ARE "fabulous", lol!) and I appreciate that you shared about your own not totally positive experiences on the boards.. I applaud you for expressing - and standing by - your views that apparently are not shared by all - but what a boring place that would make it!! You and several other posters have always been welcoming and open, that I have seen, and I am grateful for your reply.
Pia
-
I wish I could figure out what you click on here to quote another post, either whole or part, but I can't so I'll just respond to a few areas of your post to me, from a couple of pages back.
First, although we did 'register' very close in time, I have only been able to 'lurk; (such an unnecessarily creepy expression for what amounts to simply reading to learn and enjoy!) infrequently, while you, on the other hand, seem to be a fairly regular poster, so I think to compare us in that arena wouldn't be accurate.
You mention poster/s who appear every so many months to complain about different things, such as too many war movies, or whatever it is. I consider myself a pretty happy, friendly - and direct - person who loves to learn and enjoys several diverse topics of discussion on the internet (and off, as well, lol.), and classic films (specifically horror, noir/crime, sci-fi and mystery) is just one of those. I am not positive that you meant some subtle accusation that this person/s was in fact, me, but I can tell you, it wasn't. That ISN'T my style, and if you were to read any or all of my first 60 posts you will see the sort of contributor I am. that is, one who enjoys a give and take.
I do hear that you disapprove of the post/s I made on this thread. I am only sorry that you did not actually read them. Because I believe I made it pretty clear that I had seen incidences here and there of a kind of 'cliquism', for lack of another term, even BEFORE this thread appeared, one or two which affected me, personally, one or two that did not. But, there they were, clearly, and, this thread just seemed to prove out what I had been seeing and feeling. Admittedly pretty vehemently, I called it like I saw it. Believe me, I understand how really enjoyable long-term board relationships can be, as I am happy to say that I enjoy several. One board I am at at some point most every day - i t is my (and about 50 other peoples'), pit stop, happy hour, student center, coffee klatch, group therapy, debating club ,political forum, comedy club, gossip salon, girl's dorm, and moms'kid-free zone. But we take care with newcomers, its tough to be new and we always know that from whence we came ' - there is most likely more of 'us' out there. Everyone has something new and different and interesting to bring to the table, if they are sincere - but how will people who seem closed ever get to benefit? You may be closing your eyes and ears to the best story you ever heard, the most fascinating experiences of learning, the greatest laugh you ever had - if you place in front of yourself even the hint of an attitude of elitism, of unwelcoming, or disinterest. I felt some of those things from some of the people here. I didn't care for it, and the post I made yesterday was IN RESPONSE, and hardly my 'opening line'.
Message was edited by: Pia, for typos.
-
Look, that is really very kind of you, it truly is, especially after I have just lambasted everyone here. But what I said about the other boards I belong to is true. I haven't seen anyone dismissed out of hand simply because they are just discovering a place. What WILL get people ignored or snubbed is their conduct on the board over time. It is very strange to be thoroughly enjoying feeling a part of something - I'm referring to one of the movie game threads - then slowly getting little clues that, when push comes to shove for lack of a better phrase, someone's turn is going to be passed over so a buddy can be replied to. It just stops being fun at that point. Then I see this thread - and it all seemd to begin to make sense. And to the best of my knowledge, this is not a private, member-owned board. chip, thank you for your sweet reply, I didn't exactly deserve it!!, But it is only that I have never seen this type of thing, and I enjoy membership on quite a few boards, with diverse areas of interest, although I really only have time for regularly visiting two. Its ok, I blew off steam and said what was on my mind. I'll be around, there are many good forums here. Thank you, ChipHeartMovies, Happy New Year.
-
Oh, come ON - "newbie" this and 'newbie" that. Are you kidding? You sound like such unbelievable snobs, on some level you have got to realize that you do.. But that must be because none of you were ever new here - never once did you ever make a first or a 30th post - thats it, isn't it? You were all born here, I know, I know.. What utter arrogance. Well, it is good that you all (what, all 6 of you?) have got each other, and therefore will never become bored with one another (your individual and collective fonts of film knowledge are bottomless, naturally), so that an interesting, interested "newbie", who just may have more to offer than wondering who sings the TCM Remembers song, or the name of a movie that scared them at aged 4, or if anyone knows anything about a film called "The Blue Dahlia" (no, NOT Gardenia) would never be interesting enough for the present 'oldies' around here. Since paragraphs don't seem to 'take' on this board, I'll close by saying I'll be going to one of the two message boards where I am not new, and if I WAS, I would be welcomed, and then appreciated or not, on the merits of what I subsequently contribute - not my fabulously high post count. One last thing - at least TCM ( the network that shows films, remember?) is separate from you self-congratulatory bores, and will be around for the rest of us to enjoy, so yes, by all means, knock yourselves out., its a GREAT little thread you've got going here,
-
Would just like to say that I really did have fun playing this game for a while, but the fact that new people who aren't a part of the 'old boy network' around here getting ignored is pretty hard to miss. So enjoy, and Happy 2009.
-
I'm right there with you, ladygerri. I recall in the early 2000's, when we used to live in an area where the cable company carried something called the Starz/Encore Action Pack - or something like that. First, they had a channel that played a different genre of films/old TV shows & made-for-tv movies every day of the week, for instance, Monday was Action, Tuesday Romance, etc Friday was 'Mystery' day - my fave! THEN, they must have answered my prayers and developed that idea into an entire channel for each genre! I thought I was in Paradise - an entire channel showing 24/7/365 mysterys. That is where I first saw not only awesome (and some obscure & wonderful!) old films, including foreign ones, but also the most incredible TV shows from the 50's, 60, 70's & 80's!. I am in my late 20's now, so I was thrilled to be seeing shows like, "Burke's Law', Mickey Spillane's Mike Hammer', with Stacey Keach, the original 'Dragnet', and so many others. And that is where I saw 'Ellery Queen', the late 60's tv series with Jim Hutton (who I recognized from "Where the Boys Are'). I also love the old Charlie Chans, and Sherlock Holmes, Crime Doctor, The Whistler and others - which I have TCM to thank for. I also wish they would bring back a series they ran in april of '06, called 'Watching the Detectives'. Remember that? What can we do to convince them??!!
-
Guy Green was cinematographer for 'Great Expectations', which starred Freddie Bartholomew
-
Agh! The title escapes me!! - The Toulouse-Lautrec film with Jose Ferrer!
nw: avenue
-
Now this has happened to me more than once - but only on the TCM message board, whereby I type a post with two or three brief paragraphs - and the final paragraph is completely left out. This has just happened again, in the post below. I have tried editing, which worked another time - but not here. Anyway, the second film I am interested in is a 70's version of the 'Dahlia' case, starring Lucy Arnaz(?!), and Epram Zimbalist, Jr. any info would be helpful.
-
I have a couple of film questions, however since they are somewhat related, I will just put them in one post.
First, being one of those strange folk mildly fascinated by the Black Dahlia' case, and things related to the murder of Elizabeth Short, I was wondering about a film.that is always accredited for Short's now-infamous nickname. It must be a 1946 or 47 film, called "The Blue Dahlia" which according to the usual lore, was playing about the time Elizabeth was riding with Red Manley (sp?) along the PCH, on his business trips. Because she often wore black (probably due to her owning so few clothes, and 'basic black' went with everything and never went out of style) some diner cook along the route is said to have dubbed her, 'BLACK Dahlia'. (Also, perhaps because her hair was black and both the clothes and hair contrasted so dramatically with her very fair skin)
So I am wondering if TCM has ever shown it, or if anyone has even seen it.
The second movie I am wondering about either is a 70's made-for-tv movie or a B-film of the same era, about the case, maybe in limited release starring of all people, Lucy Arnez and more hopefully, Ephram Zimbalist, Jr., as the lead detective.(possibly a composite of a few of the actual officers who worked the case.) also, I am interested in the availability of both films.
Any info would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Pia
-
That was one weird movie, and whether you like it or didn't, it is entirely unforgettable. Somehow, I don't really see Glenn Corbett as a pharmacist, that was some VERY odd casting, not his usual from that era, I don't think! I didn't necessarliy suss out the end - I just knew that the "older brother" wasn't exactly a brother - although Jean Arliss did a decent job playing a guy, I thought.
Also, isn't that one of those films where there is some "crossing of the proscenium arch" as they say in theater, when the audience is spoken to? And a ticking clock, counting down the time until...I forget what, the killer revealed? Mayb e I am getting it mixed up with another movie.
-
For Times Square - Angel Heart
nw: cucina
Message was edited by: Pia
-
No, it doesn't anymore, either.
"THE BLUE DAHLIA" on TCM 1/10/09
in Film Noir--Gangster
Posted
I am sadly ignorant on the topics of liscensing, revunes, leasing and who owns films, but I hope that whatever does happen in that area, that it is all 'equitable', somehow. I wouldn't be exactly comfortable with getting something so pleasurable if any one is getting 'cheated' in the bargain. Sigh, but then....