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

Finding my way thru old films


KidChaplin
 Share

Recommended Posts

I haven't been on here in awhile and I used to go by the name of John Wayne's line in True Grit when he told Robert Duvall to "fill his hand." 

 

I haven't been able to watch films in awhile either and I am just getting back into watching some of the old classics. I just watched "Judgment at Nuremberg" for the second time and I found I was able to follow it better. It also made me appreciate the performances even more too. Montgomery Clift and Judy Garland really stood out! I also finished "North By Northwest." I say this at the risk of being blasted, but I didn't enjoy it all that much. Cary Grant was great and the storyline was really intriguing, but I thought it was a bit too long. 

I have "The Philadelphia Story" and "Arsenic and Old Lace" on hold at the local library as I have become a Cary Grant fan. His humor crossed with his debonair personality is a great mix. 

Much to my surprise, I have also found I am getting to be a big Perry Mason fan. I have only seen a handful of episodes, but liked them the more I saw them. Looking forward to a lot more episodes! 

I have the following on my list of "movies yet to see." 

HOLIDAY INN

BELLS OF ST. MARY’S
INHERIT THE WIND
ARSENIC AND OLD LACE
BACHELOR AND THE BOBBY SOXER
THE BISHOP’S WIFE
THE PHILADELPHIA STORY
VON RYAN’S EXPRESS
A BRIDGE TOO FAR
THE LONGEST DAY
ALL ABOUT EVE
IT HAPPENED ONE NIGHT
SHANE
THE MIRACLE WORKER
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

KidChaplin, you have some good films to look forward to on your list.  I've seen most of them and my favorite is All About Eve, which is one of my favorites of all time (very close to the top of my list).  It is so well written and everyone in it is terrific; just about perfect.  As for Cary Grant, I like The Philadelphia Story  the best from your list.  He's good in everything.  My only quibble is, for me, he is a little too frantic in Arsenic and Old Lace but maybe that's what the story calls for.  You only have one western on your list.  I really like Shane and have grown to like it more as I've seen it a few times, thanks to repeated viewings on TCM.  It's become one of my favorite westerns.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have "The Philadelphia Story" and "Arsenic and Old Lace" on hold at the local library as I have become a Cary Grant fan. His humor crossed with his debonair personality is a great mix. 

I have the following on my list of "movies yet to see." 

HOLIDAY INN

BELLS OF ST. MARY’S
INHERIT THE WIND
ARSENIC AND OLD LACE
BACHELOR AND THE BOBBY SOXER
THE BISHOP’S WIFE
THE PHILADELPHIA STORY
VON RYAN’S EXPRESS
A BRIDGE TOO FAR
THE LONGEST DAY
ALL ABOUT EVE
IT HAPPENED ONE NIGHT
SHANE
THE MIRACLE WORKER

 

They're all good (even "Inherit the Wind", which, despite a dream-team cast, comes off as knee-jerk atheist fan-fiction), and good to know you're using the local library's Hold function to fill in for whatever you can't wait for TCM to show.

With Netflix, local TV and Blockbuster now having betrayed our culture, it's time for the humble library and DVD/Blu-ray to take their rightful place again.  :)

 

(And of course, no Cary Grant retrospective would be complete without Tony Curtis' version in "Some Like It Hot", but you've probably seen that already.)  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of great choices here! My favorite in your list of "not seen" is All About Eve. I also like Holiday Inn. I recommend viewing Holiday Inn as part of a double feature with White Christmas.

 

As for Cary Grant, I love The Philadelphia Story (though it's more Katharine Hepburn & James Stewart's story, IMO). I also like Arsenic and Old Lace because he's so wacky.

 

My favorite of Cary Grant's films though are: To Catch a Thief, Bringing Up Baby, Charade, Notorious and The Awful Truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, folks! I appreciate all the feedback. Makes me feel like I'm back in the TCM swing of things.

 

I really love good classic "all star" movies like Judgment at Nuremberg, The Longest Day, etc. because I want to see how great stars mix and play off of one another. I remember when I first learned of Whatever Happened To Baby Jane?. I saw Crawford and Davis and thought "Oh, this HAS to be good!"

Even though it wasn't an all out all star movie, it was a dream matchup! 

One movie I was watching recently and didnt get to finish was "The Country Girl" with Holden, Crosby and Kelly. Holden's grit and Crosby's charm was a great match too. And Grace Kelly played the dressed down wife convincingly. 

 

Some of the more recent movies I have seen are Bad Day At Black Rock, Run Silent Run Deep, Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House, Now Voyager & Marty. Pretty good variety, huh?!  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really love good classic "all star" movies like Judgment at Nuremberg, The Longest Day, etc. because I want to see how great stars mix and play off of one another.

I'd recommend Ride the High Country (Joel McCrea and Randolph Scott), The War Wagon (John Wayne and Kirk Douglas), Seven Days in May (Burt Lancaster, Kirk Douglas, Fredric March) as just a few films with great stars playing off each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're all good (even "Inherit the Wind", which, despite a dream-team cast, comes off as knee-jerk atheist fan-fiction), and good to know you're using the local library's Hold function to fill in for whatever you can't wait for TCM to show.

With Netflix, local TV and Blockbuster now having betrayed our culture, it's time for the humble library and DVD/Blu-ray to take their rightful place again.   :)

 

(And of course, no Cary Grant retrospective would be complete without Tony Curtis' version in "Some Like It Hot", but you've probably seen that already.)  

 

Inherit the Wind as knee-jerk atheist fan-fiction:  Interesting.    To me it was just presenting that POV as reasonable and logical.  But the Kelly character was hardcore.    It was also risky given that even today,  being an atheist (which I am), is viewed as being 'bad'.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Inherit the Wind as knee-jerk atheist fan-fiction:  Interesting.    To me it was just presenting that POV as reasonable and logical.  But the Kelly character was hardcore.    It was also risky given that even today,  being an atheist (which I am), is viewed as being 'bad'.

 

It represents all the paranoiac stereotypes that atheists have about the outside world:

Not only are any small-town folk in favor of the Bible depicted as believing the Bible word-literally (since no sects exist that would take it as abstract or allegory), and organizing in big torch-and-pitchfork mobs to lynch anyone who disagrees while singing hymns, the New Testament is not mentioned once in the two and a half hours--Frederic March, after climactically being Scienced to death and then never seen again, recites the books and conveniently keels over after Psalms.

Also, the real-life Scopes was one of a group of activist teachers who had organized to challenge the law, not some poor innocent-shlub Darrin Stevens who was caught in the medieval grind because "he only wanted to think!...Why is everyone after me??"

And the speech where Tracy says "to have one new idea we must sacrifice another" only comes off as a vindictive wet-dream fantasy of atheist Fascism--The dream of finally getting some legal authority to tell the people "Sorry, folks, just passed a law, the more sensible idea's here, like it, lump it, or go back to your caves!"

 

Although yes, the Gene Kelly journalist is only there to serve the atheist's social excuse of "Hey, but at least I'm not a total cynical crank like some OTHER atheists might be, I'm just another tolerant guy who's nice to everybody on the street and wants to be reasonable...", which Spencer Tracy gets to disclaimer himself with in the closing scene.

(And y'know, for his screen image as a "nice guy", it's occasionally disturbing how many insincere slimeballs Kelly could play--Even in the MGM musicals, he was usually the slick girl-chasing hustler.)

 

And yes, Judgement at Nuremberg is the much better Spencer Tracy All-Star Courtroom Drama, but then, there's not much there to offer disagreement.

 

jkl2000

 

I wish Netflix had some idea of what Classics were!

 

I just wish Netflix had some movies!

(As I ruminate upon for the subject of this week's blog post, in the .sig.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The Longest Day is a long one.

 

Yeah,   I remember going to see it when it came out.  It WAS one of the longest days I spent sitting in a movie theater.  At THAT time at least.

 

As far as other "old" movies with "all star" casts, one idea might be HELL IS FOR HEROES with

 

STEVE McQUEEN

 

BOBBY DARIN

 

FESS PARKER

 

BOB NEWHART

 

JAMES COBURN

 

HARRY GUARDINO

 

NICK ADAMS

 

 

Saw it on the bill with BIRDMAN OF ALCATRAZ back in '62 and has been a favorite of mine since.  And if you like old movies that examine the human condition and/or expose the dark side of human nature and like that, try ACE IN THE HOLE('51) with KIRK DOUGLAS and JAN STERLING.  One movie from "back then" that still resonates.

 

 

Sepiatone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish Netflix had some idea of what Classics were!

Netflix knows what "the classics' are...they just don't show 'em anymore.

2012 was probably the apex for classic films on NF,after that things started going downhill.

In 2014 it became painfully obvious to me what direction NF was headed,that's when i dropped my sub.

Now i restart my sub once a year when the new seasons of House Of Cards and Marco Polo begin.

After watching i cancel my sub for another year.

 

Can hardly wait for Filmstruck/Criterion channels to begin service AND come to Roku.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Netflix knows what "the classics' are...they just don't show 'em anymore.

2012 was probably the apex for classic films on NF,after that things started going downhill.

In 2014 it became painfully obvious to me what direction NF was headed,that's when i dropped my sub.

Now i restart my sub once a year when the new seasons of House Of Cards and Marco Polo begin.

After watching i cancel my sub for another year.

 

Basically, because the studios won't license the movies to them anymore--Warner, who already believes they can't sell more than a half-dozen classic films we already know, is but one studio that wants to push a la carte Digital VOD as The Future, and sees Netflix's one monthly subscription as "the Enemy".  And if it offers catalogue at all for license, only offers a handful of easily marketable franchise packages from the 80's and 90's that everyone already knows.

NF CEO Reed Hastings, OTOH, is happy to be the House of Cards That Daredevil Built, and claim that they've "had to reduce spending" on relicensing classics in order to fund more bold, Emmy-nominated original programming.

(2012, btw, was the year StarzPlay had its big falling-out with NF, ended its partnership, and took a thousand of its mainstream 20th-cty. big-studio catalogue movies with it when it left:  "Netflix-pocalypse",  2/11/12. )

 

Just try and tell the current generation that both Streaming and HBO premium cable's vintage programming is disappearing, and all you hear from are the current binge-heads who say "Who cares, just leaves more Game of Thrones for the rest of us!", and talk about all the hundreds and hundreds of "new viewing options" they have to tune for at their fingertips.

Uh, there's more, and there's better...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its time for people to give up the idea of "One stop shopping" for films, classic or otherwise. The old paradigms are fading away. Companies are free to branch out and start their own services tailored to their own tastes.

 

To get all you want, you now have to cobble several services together. That's the way of the future.

 

I personally don't mind it. I always choose the freedom of choice over the security of the bundle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To get all you want, you now have to cobble several services together. That's the way of the future.

 

I personally don't mind it. I always choose the freedom of choice over the security of the bundle.

Cobbling services is what i've bin doing for more than 4 years since i dropped Dish.

I don't mind doing it...i can see what i want when i want,but i don't cobble NF anymore.  :)

Service cobbling + a YUUUGE personal library on disc and EHDD's lets me be my own programmer.

I can cobble together a classics movie schedule just as good as...no,Better than,TCM's own movie schedulers cuz i have the freedom to taylor the schedule to fit my own tastes/preferences,not somebody else's. :P 

For Halloween my YUUUGE library of horror/sci-fi flicks is next to none (well almost).Great flicks too,a lot of classics,others are newer/common,some others are fairly obscure,hard to find. B) 

I've bin happier with my tv viewing since i dropped sat.TV watching is so much better since i took over the job of programming for myself.

I don't like bundles either. :angry: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its time for people to give up the idea of "One stop shopping" for films, classic or otherwise. The old paradigms are fading away. Companies are free to branch out and start their own services tailored to their own tastes.

 

To get all you want, you now have to cobble several services together. That's the way of the future.

 

I personally don't mind it. I always choose the freedom of choice over the security of the bundle.

 

But you're not getting a choice--It's not just Netflix, studios are taking their movies away from ALL the services.

Got Amazon Prime (or at least use it for something other than free shipping?)  It's an indie/PD ghost town.  Except for the digital-VOD movies, of course.  Got Hulu?--For reruns, I'm assuming...They don't have movies, except for Criterion, and say bye-bye to those.

 

It's the same thing I said on my blog post:  "Choice" is getting what you want, not what you can find, or what you decide to settle for.  We talk about "viewing options", because we're still swooning over our honeymoon of having so much in front of us for the taking, it's not until later that it sinks in that very little of it is what we want.  So we find something else instead, and talk ourselves into getting hooked on that.

It's like the old joke about choosing between hospital food and airline food*:  It's an OPTION, but it's not exactly what you'd call a "choice".  When I choose a disk off the shelf at the library, or even a TV-rerun boxset--like we could back in the days when Netflix was a library of mail-disks we were curious to look up--I'm choosing my viewing.

Anything else, and I'm just doing the same "500 channels and nothing on" least-objectionable-programming surfing that we all did back in the days of broadcast and cable, that we're all so giddy and happy we think we're getting away from.

 

Most of us still prefer Netflix as a "one-stop" because we don't WANT to pay five channels at $6.99 each just to get one or two good things to watch a night.

If there is a future of specialized channels, it'll have to be in studio-owned channels--like a Criterion-owned channel or a Warner-owned TCM channel--where the studios have vested interests in NOT grudging their content off of.  Sony had a good thing with Crackle back in the early days when it was a free ad-supported service of Sony movies and shows, but, being Sony, they didn't have the first clue what to do with it and ran it into the ground.  And HuluPlus is already so far in Comcast/Universal's pocket, imagine how much better it would be if they went all the way.

With all the talk of "If Disney isn't going to buy Twitter, who will they buy?", there's been what-if's of Disney buying Netflix, and that could potentially be the best thing that ever happened to it in the last four years.

 

----

* - "It's like elections:  They'll both keep you from starving, but neither one will make you leap into the air like that dog from the old Quick Draw McGraw cartoons." - Dennis Miller

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its time for people to give up the idea of "One stop shopping" for films, classic or otherwise. The old paradigms are fading away. Companies are free to branch out and start their own services tailored to their own tastes.

 

To get all you want, you now have to cobble several services together. That's the way of the future.

 

I personally don't mind it. I always choose the freedom of choice over the security of the bundle.

 

I'm a proponent of having more options too.  I just really really hate streaming.

 

For me though it comes down to two things, quality of programming and quality of delivered goods.  As I understand it, services like Netflix and devices like Roku only work by streaming over a shared resource.  Now in this day and age, there are many people sharing internet services.  So that inevitably leads to streaming interruptions,  I know it happens, I read about it here.  It also happens to digital Cable TV when the service provider puts too many subscribers onto a single node.  The only way I have found to get around that is to subscribe to satellite, which is by far the least interruptable resource, outside of a heavy rain or snow storm. 

 

There is a concrete reason why home-studio based radio talk show hosts all still use dedicated ISDN lines to send the audio of their voice to headquarters to be broadcast.  Guaranteed connection and absolutely no interruptions. [This is an old technology that dates back to the 1980s.]

 

The way around this for a Roku-type device would be simple.  Modify the standard terms of service to include the option for certified devices to download and store the entire movie first.  Essentially offer a Roku that has a cheap built-in DVR, but one that downloads all at once, like a podcast (NOT using streaming).  An HD download for a average-length TCM movie might take around 10-15 minutes to download over an average cable internet connection.  That way any momentary interruptions that one might encounter from streaming over the shared internet service would be circumvented (if interrupted, a file transfer would simply pick up where it left off, until transfer is completed).

 

If, and only if, they did that might I become interested in using the internet as a serious alternate viewing medium. 

 

I already do something similar with Youtube, using the Firefox Add-on called "Youtube Video and Audio Downloader".  Instead of streaming, it downloads the video as a single large file to the hard drive, which you can open with a video player and enjoy without any interruption.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

...using the Firefox Add-on called "Youtube Video and Audio Downloader".  Instead of streaming, it downloads the video as a single large file to the hard drive, which you can open with a video player and enjoy without any interruption.

Sounds like a great add-on...wish i'da had it a while back before they went nuts at YT and removed all those old (and not so old) videos that used to be there,some of them so rare copies couldn't be found anywhere else.The Add-on would'a saved a lot of time for me,and the video's almost definitely would'a had better PQ by side stepping YT's slow streaming rate.At least that's my guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like a great add-on...wish i'da had it a while back before they went nuts at YT and removed all those old (and not so old) videos that used to be there,some of them so rare copies couldn't be found anywhere else.The Add-on would'a saved a lot of time for me,and the video's almost definitely would'a had better PQ by side stepping YT's slow streaming rate.At least that's my guess.

 

It might not have existed a while back.  I don't remember seeing this, but then I might not have been looking that hard.

 

Prior to using a Firefox plug-in, I used to use a free Windows program, which I would no longer recommend to anyone.  It had some adware attached to it, and I no longer use Windows on my laptop computer (Now I use Linux Mint).  I only use Windows on a couple other stand-alone computers which run video processing and DVR software, but one is no longer connected to the Internet and the other only on a very limited basis, that is another story for another thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a proponent of having more options too.  I just really really hate streaming.

The way around this for a Roku-type device would be simple.  Modify the standard terms of service to include the option for certified devices to download and store the entire movie first.  Essentially offer a Roku that has a cheap built-in DVR, but one that downloads all at once, like a podcast (NOT using streaming).  An HD download for a average-length TCM movie might take around 10-15 minutes to download over an average cable internet connection.  That way any momentary interruptions that one might encounter from streaming over the shared internet service would be circumvented (if interrupted, a file transfer would simply pick up where it left off, until transfer is completed).

 

Vudu's app on the game consoles does that already--Since Playstations and X-Boxes already have hard-drives to store permanent soft games and movies upon, you have the option of downloading your entire movie selection first, rather than stream it through a tablet, smart-TV app, or Roku without storage.

Of course, on my normal average-customer 3.5-5mbps connection, takes about two days on and off to do it, which is why I only use it for special occasions.  (Eg. new-release movies I missed in theaters, for which there are no more disk-Netflix and Blockbuster rentals...Not to mention, Redbox never stocks Blu3D titles.)  

 

That's the main problem with 4K UHD's current house-divided, in that the hardware companies want a disk format and the movie studios want a streaming format, and few people alive have the sort of bandwidth needed to stream 4K without interruptions, let alone download it.  And if you do, better be sure you can afford it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vudu's app on the game consoles does that already--Since Playstations and X-Boxes already have hard-drives to store permanent soft games and movies upon, you have the option of downloading your entire movie selection first, rather than stream it through a tablet, smart-TV app, or Roku without storage.

Of course, on my normal average-customer 3.5-5mbps connection, takes about two days on and off to do it, which is why I only use it for special occasions.  (Eg. new-release movies I missed in theaters, for which there are no more disk-Netflix and Blockbuster rentals...Not to mention, Redbox never stocks Blu3D titles.)  

 

That's the main problem with 4K UHD's current house-divided, in that the hardware companies want a disk format and the movie studios want a streaming format, and few people alive have the sort of bandwidth needed to stream 4K without interruptions, let alone download it.  And if you do, better be sure you can afford it.

 

LOL  I'm only thinking of standard HD at this point.  4K is going to have a more limited market.  So you are saying that the streaming services actually allow for a (non-streaming) direct file download using those devices?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL  I'm only thinking of standard HD at this point.  4K is going to have a more limited market.  So you are saying that the streaming services actually allow for a (non-streaming) direct file download using those devices?

 

 

Vudu does (on the game consoles w/hard drive) and Playstation and X-Box's own movie services offer download, Amazon Instant doesn't.  Can't speak for AppleTV, as I don't have that, but think they started out with an iTunes-download format.

Vudu's got a good selection--even including some of the rare studio-MOD titles like Warner Archive--but the reason most of us prefer subscription is that we don't want to pay for every single thing we watch.  That's what killed DiVX, you know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vudu does (on the game consoles w/hard drive) and Playstation and X-Box's own movie services offer download, Amazon Instant doesn't.  Can't speak for AppleTV, as I don't have that, but think they started out with an iTunes-download format.

Vudu's got a good selection--even including some of the rare studio-MOD titles like Warner Archive--but the reason most of us prefer subscription is that we don't want to pay for every single thing we watch.  That's what killed DiVX, you know.

 

I haven't been following this segment of the market.  So it sounds like someone has at least set some sort of precedent towards this end.  That sounds like a good start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

© 2023 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...