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

Recommended Posts

On 11/22/2021 at 9:15 AM, Sir_Rickster said:

Wish Robert was still here.

 

On 11/23/2021 at 1:17 PM, Giggles Widlansky said:

So many films "Robert would never have allowed" were absolutely allowed and introduced by, er,  Robert.

Robert Osborne also gave content warnings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the difference between TCM Underground and TCM ^Above^ Ground.  It has to do with 'Class'.

(Since Robert Osborne was a classy guy I think he'd understand this).

On TCM Underground a character says "EAT SH**IT AND DIE!"

On TCM ^Above^ Ground the character says "EAT EXCREMENT AND PERISH!"

👍

Just to clarify, I have no idea what I'm talking about.  It's late.  I drank too much caffeine.  My fertile mind is working overtime . . . or something.  Alreet then. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mr. Gorman said:

Here's the difference between TCM Underground and TCM ^Above^ Ground.  It has to do with 'Class'.

(Since Robert Osborne was a classy guy I think he'd understand this).

On TCM Underground the a character says "EAT SH**IT AND DIE!"

On TCM ^Above^ Ground the character says "EAT EXCREMENT AND PERISH!"

👍

Just to clarify, I have no idea what I'm talking about.  It's late.  I drank too much caffeine.  My fertile mind is working overtime . . . or something.  Alreet then. 

ACTUALLY....

the only part of SLEEPAWAY CAMP that I enjoy is when one kid tells another (after being told to “eat sh!t and die”) to “Eat sh!t and live”

which I love and use daily. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Allhallowsday said:

Last night TCM broadcast LUST IN THE DUST which seems perfect for Underground.  I saw it on VHS not long after such release and basically dismissed it.  Watching 15 or 20 minutes last night, I can see why it's forgettable.  It's trash, but ultimately boring.  And I like trash.  It totally belonged on Underground, as I expect it has its fans. 

PAUL BARTEL directed  it and you would probably recognize him if you saw him, he’s a pretty likable actor who’s been in quite a few things. As a Director though, he makes dull movies, which is surprising because they often have rather prurient subject matter.

His most famous film is probably “eating Raoul,” which (in spite of having a couple of absolutely hilarious moments) is mostly pretty boring.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Mr. Gorman said:

DIVINE basically 'makes' the movie; just imagine how bad LUST IN THE DUST would be without Mr. Milstead.

 I've seen it a few times; thought it was funny.  Had a good cast, too.

@ALLHALLOWSDAY:  Well, shucks, if you like 'Trash' let me recommend one of my favorite movies of all-time:  GAS (1981-Canadian).  It's on YouTube.  PARAMOUNT released it on VHS but, to date, "Gas" has never been issued on DVD or Blu-Ray.  Could be because of the extensive and expensive soundtrack.  I've seen it 25 times.  Peter Aykroyd, Dan's brother who died recently at age 65, has his biggest part in a theatrical film in "GAS" as a sister-obsessed brother.  At one point his sister asks him to "zip her up" so he zips up her dress and licks her neck.  👅

YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!  (But if you like 'trash' as you say . . . I double-dog-dare-ya to watch "Gas").  😁 

You might be amazed at the volume of trash I've watched.  I'm aware of that film, but I haven't looked at it.   Maybe someday.  Thanks.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/27/2021 at 3:05 PM, Allhallowsday said:

Last night TCM broadcast LUST IN THE DUST which seems perfect for Underground.  I saw it on VHS not long after such release and basically dismissed it.  Watching 15 or 20 minutes last night, I can see why it's forgettable.  It's trash, but ultimately boring.  And I like trash.  It totally belonged on Underground, as I expect it has its fans. 

I ENDED UP finishing it this morning because I wanted something on while I drank my coffee.

It wasn't worth finishing...which is a shame, because DIVINE was a legit great actor.

There were moments in LUST IN THE DUST that kinda suggested JOHNNY GUITAR, and I like that movie, but this was flat...

and TAB HUNTER was dull and GEOFFREY LEWIS creeps me out.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

I ENDED UP finishing it this morning because I wanted something on while I drank my coffee.

It wasn't worth finishing...which is a shame, because DIVINE was a legit great actor.

There were moments in LUST IN THE DUST that kinda suggested JOHNNY GUITAR, and I like that movie, but this was flat...

and TAB HUNTER was dull and GEOFFREY LEWIS creeps me out.

Mentioning GEOFFREY LEWIS reminds me why the film is a turn-off.  Not him, but that early sequence of his gang "violating" DIVINE.  That's funny, really?  Stupid and boring. 

 

15 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

..now, if they had rewritten the part of DIVINE'S RIVAL/SISTER (played so irritatingly by LAINIE KAZAN) as more of a MERCEDES MACAMBRIDGE-TYPE and cast MARY WURONOVin the part, then that might have made ONE HELL of a movie....

MARY WORONOV is a goddess.  It might've helped, but the script was still doo-doo. 

PAUL BARTEL and MARY WORONOV appear at the beginning of CHOPPING MALL (which TCM has shown Underground) and they're the only reason to look at any of it. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tonight's a real underground movie, She Freak, a 60s semi-remake of Freaks, produced by David F. Friedman (Blood Feast, 2000 Maniacs). The second feature is Mutations aka The Freakmaker, directed by Jack Cardiff of all people, with Donald Pleasance, Julie Ege and Michael Dunn.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/28/2021 at 7:34 AM, LornaHansonForbes said:

PAUL BARTEL directed  it and you would probably recognize him if you saw him, he’s a pretty likable actor who’s been in quite a few things. As a Director though, he makes dull movies, which is surprising because they often have rather prurient subject matter.

His most famous film is probably “eating Raoul,” which (in spite of having a couple of absolutely hilarious moments) is mostly pretty boring.

I think Bartel's directing career took a big hit after the aftermath of a murder in 1989.  It was the death of actress Rebecca Schaffer, killed by a former fan in cold blood, on the very morning she was supposed to audition for The Godfather Part III. Bartel had used her in a small role as a promiscuous teen in Scenes from the Class Struggle in Beverly Hills; it was the scene showing her in bed with a man that caused her real-life killer to snap and end her life just days after he saw the film.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As a sort of a documentary look at what it was like to run a traveling carnival in the late 60s, SHE FREAK is alright…But if someone doesn’t get “she freaked”soon, my patience is going to run out.

edit: MY GOD, was JOAN CRAWFORD a producer on this? Every other scene features someone drinking a Pepsi.

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Mr. Gorman said:

Wasn't JOAN CRAWFORD featured in a 1967 "carnival movie" called BERSERK?   Maybe there was Pepsi in that one. 

yes she was, and it is VERY SIMILAR to this film in a lot of ways...although BERSERK! has, I think, just one or two PEPSI PLACEMENTS.

There were about 10 or more instances in SHE-FREAK where you could see PEPSI SIGNS, PEPSI MACHINES and/or characters drank a PEPSI from cups labeled with PEPSI.

My only complaint really is that I've always thought of CARNIVAL PEOPLE as being more into MOUNTAIN DEW (which is also a PEPSICO product!)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

SPOILER IN RE: SHE-FREAK 1967 (although you're better off knowing it before hand)

This film is an artless remake of FREAKS without any nuance or style or passion for the subject matter; building up to the reveal of the WICKED CARNIVAL SCHEMER getting her comeuppance, but whereas in the 1932 film, we can TOTALLY BELIEVE that THE FREAKS did that to OLGA BAKLANOVA, I watched this and all I could think was "Girl, just scrape that papier mache off and take those "Bugles" out from under your lip."

ps- do they still make "Bugles"? those things were good.

See the source image

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

SPOILER IN RE: SHE-FREAK 1967 (although you're better off knowing it before hand)

This film is an artless remake of FREAKS without any nuance or style or passion for the subject matter; building up to the reveal of the WICKED CARNIVAL SCHEMER getting her comeuppance, but whereas in the 1932 film, we can TOTALLY BELIEVE that THE FREAKS did that to OLGA BAKLANOVA . . .

I watched the whole thing, expecting that SCENE had to be coming SOON?!? And then <SPOILER> It totally happened off-screen, and only the after-effect remains.</SPOILER>. I felt ripped off, and feel the IMDb rating is too high still. Utter disappointment.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, mr6666 said:

at least better than SHE FREAK..........

Right??

:unsure:   :lol:

Yes, THE MUTATIONS aka DAS FREAKMÄCHER was practically BRIEF ENCOUNTER when compared to SHE FREAK (At least a lot of things happened in it.)
 

…Although both movies had scenes that shamelessly ripped off the 1933 FREAKS.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm genuinely a little surprised that MGM didn't sue the makers of SHE-FREAK into oblivion...maybe they had other things going on at the time? Or they'd let the copyright on FREAKS expire? Or maybe they just figured the filmmakers were already pretty much perched at the cusp of oblivion, and tipping them off the ledge, as it were, presented very little challenge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Freaks was a box office failure for MGM. Already heavily edited before release, it attracted a lot of negative reviews and public outrage. It was banned in some countries. After the 1932 release, MGM pulled it off the market and sold the distribution rights for 25 years. MGM probably saw no beneficial advantage in suing a low-budget film company 35 years later but this is only a guess.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...