Jump to content

Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About greenpete58

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I’ll agree that my “barking seal” wording is insulting. It was a low blow, and I apologize to the commenter (if he/she is still around). I probably should have said something like “My impression is that you rely too heavily on the interpretations and clichéd language of others who perhaps have certain 21st century social goals. Try not to be so impetuous, think for yourself, and watch the movie and character with an open mind (as I originally watched it).” Also, I do “accept” the commenter’s feelings, and I don’t consider them "wrong." (Personal feelings are realities to that individual, so how can one person "question" another person’s feelings?) What I’m questioning is the motivation behind those feelings. There’s nothing wrong with this type of questioning, and it’s been the basis of healthy human debate for hundreds of years.
  2. Anonymous, you touched a nerve here. First off, The Party is perhaps my all-time favorite film. Peter Sellers took acting improv to a whole different level in this movie, Blake Edwards' direction is loose and empathetic to the actors, and the storyline - a bumbling yet lovable actor who inadvertently destroys a stuffy Hollywood party - is something that anyone in or out of Hollywood can appreciate. Secondly...you call it "racist brown face." I call it "brown facial makeup," used to make his character - who is the hero of the movie, and who the audience can't help but love - more believable. How does the character "denigrate (Asian) Indians"? Because he's clumsy? Perhaps Inspector Clouseau then "denigrates" Frenchmen? Perhaps Barney Fife "denigrates" cops? Come on. And as far as "perpetuating stereotypes," a stereotype is a quality that is perennially and unfairly associated with a person or thing. The character of Hrundi V. Bakshi is the only instance I know of a bumbling Asian Indian. I've had many Asian Indian friends over the years, and all are intelligent, well-educated, and dignified. So I don't see how the Bakshi character could possibly be perpetuating any stereotype. Your misplaced outrage and choice of language remind me of a barking seal who's been carefully well-trained by...well, I won't say it. Lastly...I think Alicia Malone is wonderful.
  3. The original Hawaii Five-O was a fantastic show with good writing, and Jack Lord owned the role of Steve McGarrett . A definite classic. As far as the show having noir undertones, I think it comes down to how film noir is defined. Since "noir" means "black," or "dark," I think there has to be a strong undercurrent of darkness, of urban sleaziness, and maybe some irony. A crime show obviously has a certain degree of darkness and sleaziness, HFO included. Some of the plots of HFO might resemble those of some classic noir films, but the Steve McGarrett crime team was just too well-oiled, proficient, and squeaky clean. I think the color filming and sunny Hawaii setting also work against it being called "noir." I realize that these are superficial qualities, but I do think they're important. A couple folks mentioned Perry Mason and Twilight Zone, and I see those as being more noir than HFO.
  4. I saw the remake of The Fly long ago and was really turned off. I agree with critic Leonard Maltin that Goldblum was a great casting decision, and the movie is intense, but it "goes over the line to be gross and disgusting." The best horror movies avoid the gross-out and concentrate on the psychological. (Hitchcock was brilliant at this.) As with so many other film genres (and in society in general), while the technology has improved there's also been a real "dumbing down" over the last few decades. I guess that's why I love TCM. So for the above reason, maybe the remake would be good for TCM Underground, even though it's a big-budget picture.
  5. Smacking rugs outdoors wasn't exactly what I was thinking when I said "outside work," but I think I see some tongue in cheek in your remark. Yes, boys often cut grass back then instead of their dads - and still do - but it was still generally a "male chore," and it still is judging by the homes in my suburban neighborhood. The women who mow are invariably single. But...this is veering way off-topic. Judging by that classic Winston commercial, Fred and Barney were Hollywood stars who liked to catch an occasional butt.
  6. The roles were more clearly defined back then. Most husbands and fathers worked for the paycheck, and did the outside work and construction-related inside work. The wives and mothers handled the kids and did the "domestic" inside chores (cooking, cleaning, laundry, etc.). That was definitely the scenario with my parents, anyway. So...the Flintstone commercial probably is out of the ordinary (which is why it's humorous), as most wives then didn't mow grass, the husbands did.
  7. Message board topics, anywhere, can get very strange. Bottom line: cigarette smoking is a dirty, health- and life-threatening habit. It's a shame the science about tar and nicotine damage was still in the closet during Hollywood's Golden Age. Undoubtedly, these stars with their ever-present ciggies influenced a lot of people to take up smoking just to appear classy or "cool." Reading on Wikipedia about how so many of them succumbed to cancer, COPD, or heart disease is eye-opening. I smoked a bit when I was younger (god knows why) and am really glad I gave it up.
  8. OK, I see your point about PC. If we define it like you do, perhaps it does swing both ways. I guess removing two lesbians kissing could be regarded as Hallmark being politically correct for conservative religious groups. Those religious groups probably view the original commercial as Hallmark trying to strike a blow for diversity (i.e., being politically correct). Like John Prine sings, "It's a big old goofy world." I like Ben Manckiewicz. I hope he remains as TCM host a long time (Young Turk or not). And since you're an "insider," nice to hear that TCM hasn't bowed to any pressure, right or left, and I'm glad it continues to air its films uncensored.
  9. Well, I'll take these one at a time, James (Django). Pressured by who (sic)? I think you answered your own question when you said "activist groups (from all "sides")." It's no secret that Black Lives Matter and the #meToo movement are currently very high-profile. BLM representatives made a very public appearance at Bowling Green immediately prior to the Gish Theatre being renamed. I'm speculating on TCM being pressured, of course, but I think it's a valid speculation. And I'm not convinced TCM receives similar pressure from other "sides," as you suggest. Oh, and political correctness has ALWAYS been a reality in America. I think this statement comes down to how we define "political correctness." Most of us view PC as being attempts to assuage certain disadvantaged or historically discriminated groups through certain careful, "sensitive" language and actions. George Carlin called it "censorship from the Left." What we call PC is a recent phenomenon (maybe dating to civil, women's, and gay rights of the '60s and '70s?). What you refer to...censorship of sexuality and curse words during the Production Code...relates more to the prudishness and conservatism of studio heads, beginning with Louis B. Mayer, Jack Warner, etc. in the 1930s. My POV: creators and content-providers should be free to provide whatever type of content they want. Consumers can avoid content they don't view as "PC". I'm on the fence with your first sentence. The First Amendment is a cornerstone of American democracy, but I'm not a strict interpreter, particularly when it comes to excessive/gratuitous violence and child pornography. I do agree with your second sentence, and I avoid certain TV all the time, mainly because the majority of it is an insult to my intelligence. TCM is one of the few television refuges remaining for me, along with PBS, and I hate seeing it "dumbed down" with PC on Saturday night at 8 PM.
  10. I thought your discussion of that 1,000 essentials film book (page one of this thread) was illuminating and informative. There's no reason to apologize or proclaim that you're not racist. We're just way too sensitive these days, in my opinion. While racism is still a huge problem in America, if we can't have a reasoned and mature discussion about the subject...and the related subject of political correctness...then we're in truly bad shape. My movie guide is Leonard Maltin's, and he and his team drop movie reviews every time the guide is revised, to accommodate newer films. Since I'm more interested in the 2 1/2-star films from yesteryear than the 3- and 4-star films of today, I keep a tattered copy of his 1997 edition on hand. And like you, I've noticed some interesting substitutions and changes. A guilty pleasure of mine is the 1965 film Bunny Lake Is Missing (Laurence Olivier, Carol Lynley, The Zombies). The original review of that film mentioned "several homosexual" and "oddball" characters, and I noticed Maltin revised that description to "interesting offbeat characters in the margins." (!) While I can see why some people might read into this a stigmatization of gays, there are other instances of wholesale film review substitutions, like you mention, that are undoubtedly made to accommodate a "social justice" mentality and are totally unjustified...again, in my opinion.
  11. I actually remember Run, Buddy, Run from childhood, even though it only lasted a half-season, but only the opening credits. I probably found I Dream of Jeannie, which competed in the same time slot, more interesting.
  12. Trying to see a resemblance, but my eyes can't help being diverted.
  13. Yes, you're probably correct. Although my late cousin was a silent film collector, I'm not a "silent film person," so that explains my ignorance. Thanks for your revealing information. While I hardly ever watch silent films when TCM airs them, I'm somehow fascinated by them. I love history and "old" things. For me, it seemed like there was a quantum time leap when talkies arrived. It blows me away when I see actors like Gary Cooper, Joan Crawford, Donald Crisp etc. (who I'm familiar with from their later films) honing their skills in silents. It's as if they're two different people.
  14. This is the whole problem. When you start using race as a criterion...in anything, whether minority or majority...you merely exacerbate a festering wound. Duvernay was quite supportive of ripping the Gish name off the Lillian and Dorothy Gish Theatre at Bowling Green University (to the consternation of numerous more rational people both inside and outside Hollywood). Forget Lillian Gish's legacy, forget her sister, forget context. Let's just go around removing names, that will help solve the problem. Sorry, don't think so. TCM has made a conscious decision, in my view, to jump on the PC bandwagon by employing her as a co-host. The funny thing is, "classic" movies are by and large dominated by white males! At best they ignored women and minorities, and at worst they were sexist and racist. By bringing in Duvernay and her bag of less-than Essential films, they're trying to paint lipstick on a pig. Give her a separate show, outside of The Essentials. (Just like someone suggested, probably correctly, that this thread should be separate.)
  15. Thanks for the tip about message board geography, Roy (sincerely). I'll keep this in mind next time I start a thread. However...the title of my thread is pretty self-explanatory, and no one is forcing you to read the thread. Thou dost protest too much, methinks.
© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
  • Create New...