traceyk65
-
Posts
4,162 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Posts posted by traceyk65
-
-
Screwballs!
The women of screwballs and a cute little song, too:
-
So glad you enjoyed it, crazyblonde! And feel free to post your favorites, too...
-
{size:medium}"Imagine the audacity it takes to steal {size:medium}anything{size:medium} off a dead person, especially while the body is still warm. And Glinda doesn't just steal her shoes, she somehow magics the WWotE's feet so that they curl into those curly party horns you blew at birthday parties when you were a kid. Nevermind that those feet were the only means the munchkins had of dragging a witch corpse out from under the house so they wouldn't have to smell her decomposing body for forever. Glinda just doesn't give a f**k."
LOL. Literally. The dog is just staring at me like I have lost my mind...
.{size:medium}
-
> {quote:title=twinkeee wrote:}{quote}I have not seen DRACULA (1931), but thanks for the 'heads up' as I have a HUGE aversion to rats or anything that even remotely resembles them.
Well, don;t skip the movie because of it--it's worth watching, especially for Dwight Frye's Renfield and the three wives...
Renfield:
-
-
Sort of on the same topic...something that's bugged me since the first time I saw the movie DRACULA (1931): Does anyone know why they used possums instead of rats in Dracula's castle? I looked for a video clip of the scene and couldn;t find one, but there is a scene that just cries out for rats and instead we get possums! Why??
-
-
{font:Arial}I like modern (ish) movies about the making of classic movies, like THE AVIATOR, MY WEEKEND WITH MARILYN and THE SCARLETT O'HARA WARS. Even when they aren't entirely factual, they are still a lot of fun to watch. Back in the winter, I went to see HITCHCOCK. As it was in limited release, I had to drive quite a ways, but it was, for me, worth it. I'm not the best reviewer here, but here's my take on it:{font}{font:Arial}
The film (if you haven’t seen it) is a backstage story of the making of PSYCHO--discovering the story, announcing the intent to make the movie, fighting with the studio to get it financed (the movie shows him taking a mortgage on his house, but that part was probably just made up--what bank would do that, even for Hitchcock? He probably just made a deal on profits), battles with the censors, generating word of mouth for the film etc. A lot of the conflict was exaggerated (or plain invented) and the Hitchcock marriage was somewhat “****” up (not with actual sex—but Hitchcock and Alma are both portrayed as being jealous—she of his blondes and he of her friendship with a writer.) For the most part, it’s very well done, with nice little character touches threaded all through the film. There's a scene towards the end, at the premiere of PSYCHO, where Hitchcock leaves his seat and goes out to the lobby to wait for the screams to start. Who knows if it really happened, but it just seemed like something Hitch would do. Witty dialogue (which is an essential for me) and a lot of fun to watch (even the made up parts. LOL)
{font:Arial}One thing that really impressed me about it was the way the actors captured the personalities of the people they were playing. Scarlett Johannson (who up to this point I would have called much more than set decoration, except for, possibly, LOST IN TRANSLATION) did an excellent Janet Leigh. She caught the way Janet would smile and how she walked with her arms crossed under her breasts, instead of letting them swing freely, for example (her arms, not her breasts LOL). Anthony Hopkin's Hitchcock was a bit of a caricature, but then, so was the real Hitchcock by that time. I don't know what Alma Hitchcock was like, though I know she collaborated with him on most of his movies, though probably not to the extent portrayed in the movie, but Helen Mirren can do no wrong in my eyes, so I was good with it
{font:Arial}Here are a couple of clips:
The Press Lunch (watch for “Hedda Hopper”)
{font:Arial} {font}
{font:Arial} {font}{font:Arial}The Oath of Secrecy ;{font}
{font:Arial} {font}{font:Arial} {font}
{font}
-
> {quote:title=gummball wrote:}{quote}I read the Cukor bio it was good but short on dirt. One episode he was involved with if I remember correctly he was at the beach with a bunch of his pals and one of them came on to a minor. The mother flipped out. Happened in the thirties. OR was it William Haines and his crew? Anybody know the sordid details? Also ya think Gable really had him fired from GWTW beacause Cukor knew he hustled early on in his career?
I don;t know about Gable "playing for pay" (though it was reported in the David Brett biography that he did), but Aldo Ray claimed that he (Aldo) slept with Cukor for movie roles.
-
It's Ginger Roger's and Barbara Stanwyck's birthday today.
So here's to Barbara--a video tribute on her pre-code 101 film, BABY FACE:
And one for Ginger, in comedy mode:
-
> {quote:title=Leigh86 wrote:}{quote}Glad you like!
>
> That was a very nice video! I love 'Sing, Sing, Sing'!! I admit to not being very familiar with Robert Montgomery yet, but that video has made me want to see some of his movies. He looks very likable!
He is, usually. There's a quality of...I don't know, rascally-ness (maybe?) about him. You like him even when he's not entirely nice, if that makes sense. It always amazes me how much his daughter Elizabeth, looked like him, especially when she mugs for the camera. Watch a couple of old "Bewitched" episodes, then watch that video and you'll see what I mean.
-
Happy Birthday Ginger Rogers! She's my Diva for today.
-
Figures. Fox doesn't seem to want to release anything good! I bookmarked those links to watch when I get a chance. Thanks!
-
> {quote:title=SansFin wrote:}{quote}This is one of my favorite movies!
> It is sad to say it will never air on TCM.
>
>
Why? Is it owned by Universal or Fox? It looks like it would be a good movie!
-
Here ya go. Everything you ever wanted to know about Twinkies, all in one place:
http://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/edible-innovations/twinkie.htm
-
> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote}Hey, everyone throws things once in a while when they're steamed up (perhaps like the coffee Sepia was drinking.)
> Once, upon finishing a book I realized I loathed, I threw it across the room.
>
> (It was "The Story of O", and I had to read it for some university course. Truely.
>
>
>
> Ummm...okay. LOL
>
-
For me the most ironic part (or maybe the word I want is despicable?)of the whole situation is that most of the studio heads were Jewish themselves. And I realize that, at the time, being Jewish wasn't a good thing, even in this country, and your average Joe on the streets would have shrugged when told that Hitler was rounding up Jews, but still...Wasn't JUDGEMENT AT NUREMBURG on of the first movies that showed actual footage and pictures taken in those death camps? Or did they use that footage in newsreels earlier on?
-
A fun scene from one of my favorite movies, HOLIDAY (1938)
-
Battle of the Blondes (more like a rout in my book!)
-
Nice, Liegh! I'd not seen either of those. I especially love the music for the Ginger video!
In answer...here's Robert Montgomery to "Sing, Sing, Sing." I love his crazy faces and the "bro shake" with Gable @ about 1:07 :
-
I have followed a number of the links and they lead to some very interesting articles about the studio system and Old Hollywwod and LA.
-
> {quote:title=Dargo2 wrote:}{quote}Now c'mon, dark. I'm sure Sepia meant that metafor...ummm...metophor...ummmm....he really didn't meant it literally.
Well, I once followed the advice of Dorothy Parker and did NOT toss a book aside lightly. I threw a copy of Breaking Dawn across the room once. With great force.
So maybe it WAS meant literally... -
> {quote:title=fxreyman wrote:}{quote}Well, I hate to disagree, but I care and so do a lot of other fans of today's films. I think the people who do not care are people who write here on the forums who are specifically Old Hollywood fans.
>
> To them nothing after 1960 means anything to them. And that is alright. Heck, I'm not a fan at all of the silent era. So there.
>
> Some recent movies like Lincoln, Les Miserables, True Grit, even Star Trek are films to look forward to. They all have very strong supporting casts and that helps tell the story of the movie better.
I think the point of this thread was that you don;t get those groups of supporting players that you could recognize, in every movie every time, even if you didn't know their names. They generally specialized in a certain "type" of character--the gruff dad/older man with heart of gold (ala Eugene Pallette or Charles Coburn), wise-cracking sidekick/best friend (ala Eve Arden or Thelma Ritter) the other man/woman who loses (ala Gail Patrick or Ralph Bellamy) the crazy/eccentric of indeterminate nationality (Mischa Auer or Sam Jaffe) etc etc. That was just part of the reality of the studio system--each studio had a staff of players of various types they could pull from (listen to me, going on like you all don;t know this. LOL) and you could expect to see certain people depending on which studio made the film.
That's been lost today, as someone said, because most actors are free lance. The only time you see the kind of consistency you used to get is when a director puts together an informal "company." For example, in a Coen Bros film, you can reasonably expect to see Frances McDormand, John Goodman, Steve Buscemi and John Turturro, among others. They also have a team of creative and support people they tend to work with.
-
I cannot remember if there's a thread somewhere discussing terrible movie endings? If not, what do you all think are some of the worst movie endings?
One that immediately comes to mind is the ending to WOMAN OF THE YEAR. Yeah, ok they get back together, but not until Hepburn has made an idiot of herself (in an admittedly funny scene)
and offered to give up everything, if only Tracy will try again. And yes, she has been self-centered and has expected him to make all the compromises up to that point and yes, he dials it back and doesn;t expect her to give up everything for him, but it just sort of leaves a bad taste. (And I keep wondering what happens with the kid--do they go get him? Or do they just leave him in the orphanage?) I think the original ending, which had Hepburn's character making an honest attempt to appreciate what her husband does for a living is much more realistic.
So maybe it WAS meant literally...
What movie is at 2:07 in this video??
in Information, Please!
Posted
Can anyone identify the clip at 2:07 in this movie? It looks like a silent, but I have NO idea what it is and it's bugging me. ?:| Thanks!