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

RAMBLES Part II


MissGoddess
 Share

Recommended Posts

I just LOVE it outrageously when you try and act all innocent on us! Heehee!

 

But I am! I'm always innocent! I'm a gentleman!

 

Why do you think Cathy is one-sided? she isn't a femme fatale, silly!

 

She is, too! She tells a guy to go and do everything for her while she just sits back and reaps the benefits! What is that?! She's nothing but selfish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I am! I'm always innocent! I'm a gentleman![/b]

 

Ppfftt! If you were a true gentleman you wouldn?t make fun of elegant greer and steal my strawberry shortcake.

 

Why do you think Cathy is one-sided? she isn't a femme fatale, silly!

 

She is, too! She tells a guy to go and do everything for her while she just sits back and reaps the benefits! What is that?! She's nothing but selfish.

 

That?s not the meaning of a femme fatale?to me. :D she is more like a tough girl. But she technically isn?t selfish. She doesn?t really realize how she comes off and she is just in love with a man and that?s all she knew and wanted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ppfftt! If you were a true gentleman you wouldn?t make fun of elegant greer and steal my strawberry shortcake.

 

That's because you don't share, Miss SELFISH! It's no wonder you like "Cathy"!

 

That?s not the meaning of a femme fatale?to me. :D

 

What's your meaning?! They have to be wearing long black gloves? :P

 

she is more like a tough girl.

 

A tough girl?! She's super weak!

 

But she technically isn?t selfish. She doesn?t really realize how she comes off and she is just in love with a man and that?s all she knew and wanted.

 

She wanted to be in that house! She even stayed! The heck with Heathcliff! She's Beth!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, guys! Hope you don't mind if I interrupt just for a short while to sing the praises of Vivien Leigh in SIDEWALKS OF LONDON, aka ST. MARTIN'S LANE, in which her character of "Liberty" almost seems to be an audition for Scarlett O'Hara! Liberty is manipulative, seductive, childish, willful, ambitious, and utterly irresistible to anyone who crosses her path, most notably Charles Laughton and Rex Harrison. Laughton, as a "busker" (street performer) takes petty thief Liberty, who has dreams of becoming a serious dancer, under his wing, teaching her the tricks of his trade and letting her join in with the "troupe". Liberty, however, is just waiting for a better offer, and then along comes Rex...I'm almost convinced that this film, more than FIRE OVER ENGLAND and/or A YANK AT OXFORD, must have been the one to convince Selznick to look no further for his female GWTW lead, because Viv as Liberty commands each scene with her charismatic, flirty/haughty presence, poised and in control at every turn, even when Liberty has a temper tantrum in Laughton's apartment and proceeds to break every dish he has. Liberty can turn on the tears, too, when she needs them. She yearns for money, success, stability, more than love. Liberty wants to be "in", not on the literal outside as a common busker. There is a memorable scene where Leigh, on her way to fame and fortune, looks out of a window towards the streets below, proud, confident, yet with just the merest bittersweet brush across her lively and beautiful face, watching the entertainers and their acts, at which she had just recently been a part of. She says to herself, "I'm in", and we know what she means.

 

SIDEWALKS OF LONDON, however, suffers a bit in the second half. There is too much of Laughton's anguished face and blustery/blubbery heartache, and not enough of Leigh and Harrison. Laughton is a favorite of mine, and one of the greatest film actors, but I felt his character was hogging the story somewhat. Perhaps some ego was involved on his part, which usually wouldn't bother me because Lsughton is such a genius in everything he does, but in this instance I was getting impatient and even (gasp!) a bit bored. He couldn't mentor Leigh as he did Maureen O'Hara, because Viv already had Olivier at her professional as well as personal side. Or perhaps one large talent knew another -- at this early stage, Leigh already had star power as well as acting chops, and Laughton surely knew it.

 

On a less sublime note, I'm lazing on my flamingo-pink carpet with TCM on, and I look up and Maurice Chevalier is singing about a "happy road". I don't see the credits, and I hadn't checked the schedule for that day. However, uneasily in the back of my mind was the thought that somehow Gene Kelly in his fawning Francophile mode, was involved, but I brushed it from my mind. I hear two children talking about running away. THEN.....there is a familiar voice....GENE KELLY, and my worst fears are realized. He plays an American businessman who just can't understand the Gallic mind (oh, gee, how "ironic") But then he joins forces with the lovely French mother of his runaway son's adoring little girlfriend, to find them, and learns some Important Lessons About Life. The kids already "know" -- they ask each other: "How come there are borders? Why do countries need them?" Gack

 

Edited by: Bronxgirl48 on Sep 11, 2010 12:32 AM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello My DEAR Grey friend..

 

They annoy me.

 

Ha.. they ticked ME off. :D I just get so MAD in movies (and in real life too) when I see people let their own stubbornness and selfish behavior keep them from their own happiness in life. What a waste! BAH!!

 

This has become one of my least favorite of films

 

Now that is sad and surprising to hear. I thought you were Mr. Tragedy and Darkness. ha.

 

And what kind of love is it if you leave it so easily? I'm speaking of Cathy. I do believe Heathcliff loves her. In fact, I believe he's paralyzed by his love of her. He shovels "dirt" to be with her. She wouldn't do the same for him.

 

They are both victims of their own pride (and selfishness) in some way or another. The tragedy for both of them is that they discover TOO late that all the "obstacles" they thought stood between them and their own happiness were mostly of their own making and they waited too late to do anything about it.

 

find it odd that she says she's "Heathcliff." She isn't. She's definitely "Cathy

 

I want to wait until I get the chance to see this again before I answer you. I think you are right (to a point) but I want to hear all of what she said in that conversation w/ the housekeeper before I say for sure.

 

I don't view Cathy as sacrificial. Not at all. In a way, she's very similar to Vance (Barbara Stanwyck) in The Furies. Vance would always ride to Juan (Gilbert Roland) whenever she was upset. But after using Juan for her selfish needs, she'd ride away from him to where her real interests lie

 

I can see the comparison you are making between Cathy and Vance as far as them both turning to the men they know will make them feel better emotionally when they get upset. But to follow your lead and contrast the men they turned to: Juan was selfless.. (in his love for Vance) and Heathcliff.. was not. So the similarity more or less ends there for me.

 

I give Heathcliff the benefit of the doubt since he did sacrifice for her.

 

Unlike Heathcliff, Juan never sells out. He's truly a sacrificial love. He stays true to himself. Heathcliff actually becomes what Cathy wants him to become but it leaves a bitter taste in his mouth

 

I had to put both of these statements by you side by side and read them a couple of times because at first I thought you were trying to have it both ways.. either Heathcliff was willing to sacrifice or he wasn't.. but I THINK (if I am understanding you) that you are saying that his real sacrifice was in "selling' out because he thought it would put him in the right status to finally be "worthy" for Cathy. (is that what you are saying?)

 

If so, I am not sure if I agree totally that those were his motivations entirely (or not) and again.. I will watch it more closely this time so I can answer you better.

 

And PS: I agree w/ the last part you said regarding Juan.. he stays true to his love for Vance (by giving himself up for her)and Heathcliff did sort of "sell out' to become more or less everything he did not like (in others). (but again.. I want to re-watch before I say for sure why I think he did it)

 

She's like Dr. Frankenstein, looking to create her monster. And this plays into my belief that women do dream of their ideal and men really don't

 

OH I will likely go way further with this than you might have intended but by golly I am still waiting on my copy of the movie.. ha. so I have to talk about SOMETHING.. so here it goes. HA! I think you are painting w/ a pretty broad brush to say that. (I can't tell if you are being serious or not) It is not always the WOMAN that wants to "makes the monster". I think that there could be a lot of examples we could find where men THOUGHT they had the "ideal" woman only to be made fools of and find out how wrong they were. I think it is a common thing on both sides..

 

Some PEOPLE spend all their time idolizing an "ideal" of the perfect mate and then they try to create (or RE-create) someone they want to fit into that mold. And other PEOPLE (men and women) are the opposite of this in that they try to look at a potential mate for who they really ARE and try to see them for themselves (instead of trying make them fit a pre-conceived notion of how they ought to be).

 

Nothing is SO blind as someone who has deluded himself (or herself) into believing someone is "something" they are not. ( Look at poor Edward G Robinson in Scarlet Street) You can't MAKE another person BE the person you THINK they are.. they either really ARE that way or they are not.

 

But having said ALL that.. do people.. men and women alike... have "dreams" of what they WANT to find in a "perfect" mate?? Sure. Everyone does. But the happier person is the one who is more willing to look at things honestly (and w/out the "rosey" glasses) when it comes time to decide if someone else is the "right one" or not. Better to be loved "clay feet" and all than to be put up on that pretty pedestal and be found TOO late to have those feet of clay... OH the fall out from that is NEVER a pleasant thing.

 

Ok. ha I apologize if I took that too far. You know me.. blab, blab, blab. :-)

 

And maybe that's Emily Bront?'s point. That girls expect boys to go off and slay dragons for them and then come back to spoil them royally. But isn't that one-sided

 

Well I do agree that SOME girls are like that. But it would be pretty sad if ALL girls were.. because YES it IS one sided. And PS: some men WANT to impress the girls and will LOOK for dragons to slay if they think it will win them points.

 

For me and my money.. it is WAY more rewarding (in a relationship) to tackle the dragon as a TEAM. The QT has HIS strengths.. and he brings them to the table.. and I have mine.. and I bring those to the table.. and then it's "DRAGON WATCH YOUR BACK" We are one team working together.. and that is a beautiful thing.

 

Miss G was right, I don't like Cathy because I feel she's the worst of woman. There are women in this world who say they believe in love but they'll quickly toss it aside for other things. What do we value most in life?

 

Well that's what it really boils down to in the end, isn't it? And you are right.. women like Cathy make all us gals look bad. ha. (But men like Heathcliff don't win TOO many points in my book either. He was cruel, spiteful, and very bitter.. He lashed out like a spoiled child to hurt the one he loved (and the one who took her from him) Not exactly a "model" fellow in the true love department... and not at all "selfless" and sacrificing, was he? Don't misunderstand.. he was certainly "the wounded" party.. and a very "tragic figure" in that regard. But HOW LONG (especially after the ones who hurt him are DEAD AND GONE) did he have to carry THAT grudge around and let it destroy everything he touched and all he came in contact with.. what a sad way to live (and die).

 

PS: Miss G. I NEVER knew that about Bronte and the Austens... golly.. what a thing to say.. I will take those roses ANY day over this "reality". At least (most of) Austen's characters FINALLY came to their senses.. before they DIED!! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello My DEAR Grey friend..

 

:P Howdy, Queen of the Furies.

 

I thought you were Mr. Tragedy and Darkness. ha.

 

I am! I guess "Cathy" is the female "Harry Fabian." What y'all disliked about him I dislike about her. So you've got me. :D

 

They are both victims of their own pride (and selfishness) in some way or another. The tragedy for both of them is that they discover TOO late that all the "obstacles" they thought stood between them and their own happiness were mostly of their own making and they waited too late to do anything about it.

 

I don't think Cathy really cared about love. Her wants were elsewhere. I do like how Wyler shows her and Edgar's first kiss. There's zero passion behind it. It's polite. She just "accepts" it.

 

I can see the comparison you are making between Cathy and Vance as far as them both turning to the men they know will make them feel better emotionally when they get upset. But to follow your lead and contrast the men they turned to: Juan was selfless.. (in his love for Vance) and Heathcliff.. was not. So the similarity more or less ends there for me.

 

I was comparing Cathy and Vance. Heathcliff and Juan are different, although not by much.

 

I had to put both of these statements by you side by side and read them a couple of times because at first I thought you were trying to have it both ways.. either Heathcliff was willing to sacrifice or he wasn't.. but I THINK (if I am understanding you) that you are saying that his real sacrifice was in "selling' out because he thought it would put him in the right status to finally be "worthy" for Cathy. (is that what you are saying?)

 

If so, I am not sure if I agree totally that those were his motivations entirely (or not) and again.. I will watch it more closely this time so I can answer you better.

 

Heathcliff's motivations were spite. That's the reason why he sells out. He turned bitter, and I can't blame him. Juan was always above the fray. That's where the greatest difference between the two lies. But I do believe Heathcliff sacrifices for Cathy. He doesn't want to be treated like dirt, but he takes it just to be near her. Juan is a squatter. He's poor and owns no land. That's Heathcliff. He's a stable boy. Edgar and Rip are the opposite. Juan can only offer so much. Heathcliff is the same, but I believe he's willing to try more than Juan ever would. He does so, in fact.

 

As children, Cathy attempted to build up Heathcliff's self-esteem with her fairytale. But let me ask you, does she do this for his sake or for HER sake? There is a HUGE difference between the two.

 

And PS: I agree w/ the last part you said regarding Juan.. he stays true to his love for Vance (by giving himself up for her)and Heathcliff did sort of "sell out' to become more or less everything he did not like (in others). (but again.. I want to re-watch before I say for sure why I think he did it)

 

That's what I was attempting to say.

 

OH I will likely go way further with this than you might have intended but by golly I am still waiting on my copy of the movie.. ha. so I have to talk about SOMETHING.. so here it goes. HA! I think you are painting w/ a pretty broad brush to say that. (I can't tell if you are being serious or not) It is not always the WOMAN that wants to "makes the monster". I think that there could be a lot of examples we could find where men THOUGHT they had the "ideal" woman only to be made fools of and find out how wrong they were. I think it is a common thing on both sides.

 

It is my belief that girls/women have ideas in their mind of what they want their guy to be. They will run down a "list" of these items. It is also my belief (and experience) that guys do not think this way. I rarely hear a guy going over any kind of list about a girl. "She's this, she's that." I just don't hear that from guys. Women, it's completely the opposite. Even on this board, you will hear all of this from the women but never the guys.

 

People often say, "your 'dream girl'," but I just don't have one. I don't think many guys really think this way. What about girls?

 

I'll give you an example. My cousin's ten-year-old daughter and my brother's girlfriend's 7-year-old daughter talk about kissing boys. That's their "thing," right now. Boys ain't talking about kissing girls in the same context.

 

I've had women tell me, "you'll find some girl that likes sports... " But I have never thought that way. I just think it's undefinable.

 

Well I do agree that SOME girls are like that. But it would be pretty sad if ALL girls were.. because YES it IS one sided.

 

Oh, it's not all girls. I'd never say something like that.

 

And PS: some men WANT to impress the girls and will LOOK for dragons to slay if they think it will win them points.

 

And I would probably be one of them. But I'm a sap.

 

Well that's what it really boils down to in the end, isn't it? And you are right.. women like Cathy make all us gals look bad. ha. (But men like Heathcliff don't win TOO many points in my book either. He was cruel, spiteful, and very bitter.. He lashed out like a spoiled child to hurt the one he loved (and the one who took her from him) Not exactly a "model" fellow in the true love department... and not at all "selfless" and sacrificing, was he? Don't misunderstand.. he was certainly "the wounded" party.. and a very "tragic figure" in that regard. But HOW LONG (especially after the ones who hurt him are DEAD AND GONE) did he have to carry THAT grudge around and let it destroy everything he touched and all he came in contact with.. what a sad way to live (and die).

 

He was turned into a miserable creature, which was his fault and weakness. He was very wrong to hurt everyone else as Cathy hurt him. There's no place for that. He just happened to love her that much. But she didn't love him as he loved her. And this happens quite often in life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=rohanaka wrote:}{quote}

> For me and my money.. it is WAY more rewarding (in a relationship) to tackle the dragon as a TEAM. The QT has HIS strengths.. and he brings them to the table.. and I have mine.. and I bring those to the table.. and then it's "DRAGON WATCH YOUR BACK" We are one team working together.. and that is a beautiful thing.

 

I believe it is a matter of where you are in your life. My first husband was very much my knight in shining armor. He was military pilot and so very handsome in his uniform. No dragon could have stood against him. It was grand until I found I was becoming nothing but his shadow. After all these years I am rather numb to it and think his passing when he did was good thing because it happened as I began to feel his life was not enough for me.

 

I believe Catherine's being-as-she-was was much like that. She went for glory and found it sadly lacked depth. Perhaps I read too much into her story but I feel she was very much a victim to things she could not understand and did not know how to deal with.

 

I can imagine what would happen if me and my next had to fight a dragon. We would most likely start to argue about who would use the spear. He would want me to have it since my arms are shorter than his. I would want him to have it because I am very much a close-in fighter. One of us would probably backhand the dragon and possibly slit its throat without thinking when it tried to interrupt us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am! I guess "Cathy" is the female "Harry Fabian

 

YIKES!! ha. Perish the THOUGHT, Grey Dude!! (Ms Bronte likely just rolled over in her grave!! ha) :P

 

I am going to wait until I get a chance to see this movie again (I HOPE not too much longer on my wait w/ the library.. I was #1 on the wait list for it.. so lets hope it will come in soon) and then I will try to answer more fully on some of what you said.. and also some of Miss G's comments too.

 

But I will answer this part of your comments now:

 

It is my belief that girls/women have ideas in their mind of what they want their guy to be. They will run down a "list" of these items. It is also my belief (and experience) that guys do not think this way. I rarely hear a guy going over any kind of list about a girl. "She's this, she's that." I just don't hear that from guys. Women, it's completely the opposite. Even on this board, you will hear all of this from the women but never the guys

 

People often say, "your 'dream girl'," but I just don't have one. I don't think many guys really think this way. What about girls?

 

I'll give you an example. My cousin's ten-year-old daughter and my brother's girlfriend's 7-year-old daughter talk about kissing boys. That's their "thing," right now. Boys ain't talking about kissing girls in the same context

 

I've had women tell me, "you'll find some girl that likes sports... " But I have never thought that way. I just think it's undefinable

 

 

You DO have a point about some of this. I think the answer is two-fold.. first of all.. little girls are sold a MUCH different set of stories (fairytale princess stuff) than boys. (generally speaking )and so I can see why you are saying that. (And PS: boys are sold a bill of goods too... look at the "ideal" women that get paraded around on TV and movies and magazines... we don't all come in the same package that you see in those images) so it starts early on for both boys and girls..

 

But there is more two it than that as I still maintain that once we reach a certain age (and level of maturity. or lack thereof, ha) we all have our "lists" (males and females alike) for what we want and THINK we want to find in our mate... and I have heard you say on here yourself in some of our rambles some of the qualities YOU would like to see in a woman or at the very least in a relationship. So you do have a list, whether you realize it or not.

 

So let's take a step back for a moment here and reason this out.

 

Maybe the women you are thinking of (who have such a long list) are just more specific because they have been working on their lists a lot longer..ha. (you know.. way back in that fairytale princess stage) Anyway.. all I am saying is... (and I am speaking ONLY in a general sense here and not specifically of anyone) that men make their lists too.. and sometimes a person (whether a man or woman) needs to step out of their "dreams" to be more objective when looking at potential love interests.. because let's face it... not TOO many "dream girls" or "dream men" are running around out there... but I don't mean that to sound as negative as it may seem.

 

I did not marry until I was almost 30 years old.. and I did not just casually date a lot of people while I was single (just to be 'dating") because I did not see the point.. I was more about "relationships" because I wanted to really get to know the other person.. so in those nearly 10 years of sometimes having a relationship and sometimes being alone, I had a little time to think about all of this. And I guess I am saying that I ONCE used to think (back in my foolish childhood) that I had a vision of what the perfect man would be (and BOY did I have a list and a half) and I never seemed to find that guy no matter where I looked.

 

But later in life... I realized I did not WANT the "perfect man" because ha.. then he'd just spend all HIS time finding fault with me (because I am about as far away from perfect as you can get) :-)

 

It really is not about lowering your expectaions either.. but instead it is more about deciding what your expecations REALLY are.. and washing off some of the "glitter" to make a better list. And what I found out was that what I REALLY wanted (instead of someone "perfect) was someone who was "perfect" FOR me

 

And to find THAT person... you have to REALLY know and be honest about yourself (flaws and all) to be able to recognize that other person (who is just right FOR you) when you find them. It is a process. (and rarely do the bells and whistles and fireworks that can sometimes come w/ all the "passion" of attraction at the beginning of a relationship let you SEE that other person clearly.. you have to step back from all that at some point and look at their true character objectively to see if they really are the right one for you)

 

Ok.. ha.. listen to me blabbling on and on.. sorry..again. And gee.. this has LITTLE (if anything) to do w/ Wuthering Heights.. (sorry Miss G to babble on and on out of context here) Enough is enough... So Grey Guy.. I will spare you all my "marriage" advice here.. ha. Instead, Dr. Rohanaka will be appearing live to sign autographs and will have a question and answer session at the next "How to Find your REAL True Love in 10 Easy Lessons" book signing tour.. coming soon to a Barnes and Noble near you. ha.

 

Rohanaka says: And PS: some men WANT to impress the girls and will LOOK for dragons to slay if they think it will win them points

 

The Grey Guy replies:

And I would probably be one of them. But I'm a sap

 

Ha... not true. (at least about being a sap, anyway) For all the kidding around we do, (and we DO kid around a lot.. and MOSTLY at your expense... it is just TOO fun not to, HA) I have found you to be a VERY good "dragon fighter" for the sake of some of us gals.. when there have been dragons on this board. And those of us who are getting the fire breathed on us do appreciate it.

 

Oh gee.. that sounds too nice for the likes of you.. I need to go think of some more "slams" to throw at you instead.. I can't be having you thinking I am turning "softie" here. (where is my rope?? What have I done w/ my hat pin.. I need to go find an octopus) HA :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=rohanaka wrote:}{quote}

> One of us would probably backhand the dragon and possibly slit its throat without thinking when it tried to interrupt us.

>

> Ha.. well.. at least it would still be dead. :D (there is more than one way to kill those rotten dragons, ha)

 

It has not even the remotest connection to any film but -

 

When my esso was in hospital he was working on a scene for his novel. The nurse went into his room and found him having an argument with a dragon. He told her he was a writer and showed her a tape recorder he was using to dictate the scenes. She did not care for his explanation and made notes in his chart about possible drug interactions causing mental problems. The hospital's staff psychologist visited him next day.

 

Sulphur-breathed egg-laying wyrms can really get you into trouble!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YIKES!! ha. Perish the THOUGHT, Grey Dude!! (Ms Bronte likely just rolled over in her grave!! ha) :P

 

Why?! Cathy is no angel.

 

You DO have a point about some of this. I think the answer is two-fold.. first of all.. little girls are sold a MUCH different set of stories (fairytale princess stuff) than boys. (generally speaking )and so I can see why you are saying that.

 

There you go.

 

(And PS: boys are sold a bill of goods too... look at the "ideal" women that get paraded around on TV and movies and magazines... we don't all come in the same package that you see in those images) so it starts early on for both boys and girls.

 

But guys don't really go out looking for those kind of girls. I think girls are far more caught up in all of that glitzy media stuff far more so than guys. Guys generally just want a girl they feel comfortable with.

 

But there is more two it than that as I still maintain that once we reach a certain age (and level of maturity. or lack thereof, ha) we all have our "lists" (males and females alike) for what we want and THINK we want to find in our mate... and I have heard you say on here yourself in some of our rambles some of the qualities YOU would like to see in a woman or at the very least in a relationship. So you do have a list, whether you realize it or not.

 

I may have an idea of what I like in a girl, but I really don't have any kind of list. They could be almost anything, really. And I actually think I'm rather "regular guy" with that.

 

Maybe the women you are thinking of (who have such a long list) are just more specific because they have been working on their lists a lot longer..ha. (you know.. way back in that fairytale princess stage) Anyway.. all I am saying is... (and I am speaking ONLY in a general sense here and not specifically of anyone) that men make their lists too.. and sometimes a person (whether a man or woman) needs to step out of their "dreams" to be more objective when looking at potential love interests.. because let's face it... not TOO many "dream girls" or "dream men" are running around out there... but I don't mean that to sound as negative as it may seem.

 

Maybe you should ask the QT about this. See if he had a list of things he wanted in a woman before he met the woman. I just don't think guys think like that. I have found it to be as simple as this: she's cute and she's cool. And that's about it. I believe men are very simple about love. Women tend to be complex.

 

And to find THAT person... you have to REALLY know and be honest about yourself (flaws and all) to be able to recognize that other person (who is just right FOR you) when you find them. It is a process. (and rarely do the bells and whistles and fireworks that can sometimes come w/ all the "passion" of attraction at the beginning of a relationship let you SEE that other person clearly.. you have to step back from all that at some point and look at their true character objectively to see if they really are the right one for you)

 

So Cathy found the right person. It wasn't bells and whistles, but still the right person.

 

Ha... not true. (at least about being a sap, anyway) For all the kidding around we do, (and we DO kid around a lot.. and MOSTLY at your expense... it is just TOO fun not to, HA) I have found you to be a VERY good "dragon fighter" for the sake of some of us gals.. when there have been dragons on this board. And those of us who are getting the fire breathed on us do appreciate it.

 

Ohhhhhhh, I think you gals know how to protect yourselves quite nicely. But thank you for the kind words. I must be at the end. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gee whiz, do we need to drag you through the heather at the end of a rope to get you to your senses on Wuthering Heights?

 

I still don't think Heathcliffe sold out. I remember the book indicating he didn't come by his gains in a well-begotten manner. So he hardly became "respectable" since he was out for revenge as much as to hurt Cathy. therefore, he followed his dominant emotions, letting his feelings be his guide and this is just as he always was. He didn't change. All that changed was his position in terms of power and independence. Maybe that is what you mean by "selling out". I think it's the best thing he ever did. Though he should have ENJOYED it for his own sake, and not even bothered going back to that dreary old hall. I'm sure he could have found a much better girl than Cathy, too. :D But that wouldn't be Heathcliffe and we wouldn't have a story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Bronxe Lass!

 

I quite concur, that *Sidewalks of London* had to have been the real

tantalizing "screen test" for Selznick. She shows so many different

facets of her character and never makes you hate her. I need to watch

it again because I'm a bit fuzzy on the details, though I do remember

what you said about the second half being rather Laughton-heavy (bad

pun).

 

But I love The Happy Road! I think it's such a sweet film. And

I laugh at all the Franco-American swipes.

 

I saw a few films in the last 24 hours you'd approve of more:

*The Daughter of Dr. Jekyll* and Doctor X! And I liked them both!

 

Edited by: MissGoddess on Sep 11, 2010 6:58 PM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gee whiz, do we need to drag you through the heather at the end of a rope to get you to your senses on Wuthering Heights?

 

What's wrong with my senses, Cathy?!

 

I still don't think Heathcliffe sold out. I remember the book indicating he didn't come by his gains in a well-begotten manner. So he hardly became "respectable" since he was out for revenge as much as to hurt Cathy. therefore, he followed his dominant emotions, letting his feelings be his guide and this is just as he always was. He didn't change. All that changed was his position in terms of power and independence. Maybe that is what you mean by "selling out". I think it's the best thing he ever did. Though he should have ENJOYED it for his own sake, and not even bothered going back to that dreary old hall.

 

If he's not enjoying it then it's not what he really wanted. As you and Quiet Gal have pointed out, he only did it for revenge. That's it. My saying he "sold out" is that he abandoned his true character to do something and he did it for the wrong reasons. That's selling out. He compromised himself and now he has to live with that. He's Hindley, now.

 

I'm sure he could have found a much better girl than Cathy, too. :D But that wouldn't be Heathcliffe and we wouldn't have a story.

 

And that is a major failing with Heathcliff. He was blind to who Cathy really was. Cathy pretty much let's him know what kind of girl she is very early on, but I guess he didn't care so long as he was her man. You're right, that's a film noir sap with a femme fatale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My saying he "sold out" is that he abandoned his true character to do something and he did it for the wrong reasons. That's selling out. He compromised himself and now he has to live with that. He's Hindley, now.

 

Hmmm....it sounds like what you're REALLY saying is he went out and got a job and made some money. He wasn't "Bim" anymore! :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm....it sounds like what you're REALLY saying is he went out and got a job and made some money. He wasn't "Bim" anymore!

 

Yes! That's exactly it, Cathy! :P

 

It's the kind of guy Heathcliff came to be. It was no longer him. The money and power did nothing for him, personally. It was meaningless to him. That's Cathy, not him. Heathcliff's happiness was attached to Cathy. And, yes, that's not a good thing. That's on him. That's not Cathy's fault. But Cathy really did treat him like dirt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> It's the kind of guy Heathcliff came to be. It was no longer him. The money and power did nothing for him, personally. It was meaningless to him. That's Cathy, not him. Heathcliff's happiness was attached to Cathy. And, yes, that's not a good thing. That's on him. That's not Cathy's fault. But Cathy really did treat him like dirt.

 

She did, she was very cruel, like Hindley. And spoiled.

 

And I am NOT "Cathy". I WISH I could say I was ever spoiled. Not once!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She did, she was very cruel, like Hindley. And spoiled.

 

Worse, actually.

 

And I am NOT "Cathy". I WISH I could say I was ever spoiled. Not once!

 

Who said anything about spoiled?! You'd toss aside love for material items in a blink! You'd bury Heathcliff's heart like your name was Greer Garson!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> Who said anything about spoiled?! You'd toss aside love for material items in a blink! You'd bury Heathcliff's heart like your name was Greer Garson!

 

Yes, I guess that's why I said no to those "material items" so many times in the name of love. And now I regret it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=MissGoddess wrote:}{quote}

> Hi Bronxe Lass!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bon soir, Goddess!

>

> I quite concur, that *Sidewalks of London* had to have been the real

> tantalizing "screen test" for Selznick. She shows so many different

> facets of her character and never makes you hate her. I need to watch

> it again because I'm a bit fuzzy on the details, though I do remember

> what you said about the second half being rather Laughton-heavy (bad

> pun).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's on YouTube and the print is pretty good, if you just want to refresh yourself on it. A little of Laughton goes a long way here...Viv looks so adorable and fetching in her busker outfit. (complete with top hat and cane) The only quibble I have is that she just cannot sustain a Cockney accent. But, who cares, lol?

>

> But I love The Happy Road! I think it's such a sweet film. And

> I laugh at all the Franco-American swipes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh, no, HA! i did like the child actors, especially Brigitte Fossey, she was quite charming. And me with my new appreciation of all things French, you'd think I would have embraced this movie, but, well, Gene gets a bit carried away sometimes in my opinion. I loved the title song by Maurice, but then we never hear him again, just lots of annoyingly cutesy-quaint xylophone music.

>

> I saw a few films in the last 24 hours you'd approve of more:

> *The Daughter of Dr. Jekyll* and Doctor X! And I liked them both!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FANTASTIC!! Wow! Good going!! Barry Fitzgerald's brother in DAUGHTER OF DR. JEKYLL, as you've neve seen him, lol. DR. X is a classic early Warner's horror-thriller that I can never watch in the dark. I've always been shocked by the identity of the "Moon" killer, and for years couldn't watch that actor in any other movie without thinking of him here. "Synthetic flesh!" Scary stuff! So pleased you went out of perhaps your comfort zone, to see these.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> Bon soir, Goddess!

> >

 

Bon soir, Mamselle!

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8EhV6APBFI

 

 

> It's on YouTube and the print is pretty good, if you just want to refresh yourself on it. A little of Laughton goes a long way here...Viv looks so adorable and fetching in her busker outfit. (complete with top hat and cane) The only quibble I have is that she just cannot sustain a Cockney accent. But, who cares, lol?

> >

 

Oh, thank you! I do have it on DVD-R and I re-recorded it last Tuesday in case TCM had a better print. :D

 

 

> Oh, no, HA! i did like the child actors, especially Brigitte Fossey, she was quite charming. And me with my new appreciation of all things French, you'd think I would have embraced this movie, but, well, Gene gets a bit carried away sometimes in my opinion. I loved the title song by Maurice, but then we never hear him again, just lots of annoyingly cutesy-quaint xylophone music.

> >

 

:D I agree about Gene, actually.

 

 

> FANTASTIC!! Wow! Good going!! Barry Fitzgerald's brother in DAUGHTER OF DR. JEKYLL, as you've neve seen him, lol. DR. X is a classic early Warner's horror-thriller that I can never watch in the dark. I've always been shocked by the identity of the "Moon" killer, and for years couldn't watch that actor in any other movie without thinking of him here. "Synthetic flesh!" Scary stuff! So pleased you went out of perhaps your comfort zone, to see these.

 

I was ASTONISHED to see sweet Reverend Playfair (The Quiet Man) playing a Mad Scientist!!! Oh wow!! Actually two Fordian stars because John Agar (Mr Shirley Temple) was in it, too. And my DVD had a cute interview with Agar in his later years (looking so gaunt I took him for William Wellman, at first). He was quite bemused at the popularity of what he called his "Science Fiction" movies. He seemed to skirt the word "horror". :D :D

 

I really enjoyed it, especially the "dream" sequences....was that another actress they used for Gloria Talbot's moonlit "trysts", lol? It didn't look like her. I thought Ulmer achieved some good effects and with a cast of familiar favorites, I found myself really getting into it. But I couldn't quite figure out if it takes place in England or America, ha, because John and Gloria had such American accents but she was the daughter of Henry Jekyll.

 

Loved the last scene, ha!! "Are you suuuuuuuuuuure?"

 

*Doctor X* was a lot of fun and VERY thrilling and spooky. Wonderful sets and

the monster make-up ("synthetic flesh"!) really creeped me out! When I first saw

the monster sneak up on Lee Tracy I about jumped out of my (real) skin! I like

Lee a lot in this, too, by the way, and appreciated his "Lou Costello" moments,

they made me laugh. I am becoming more appreciative of Lionel Atwill, too.

 

I was never so surprised as to learn who the real "Moonlight Killer" was! So

this was your first glimpse of him as an actor? I had never seen him so young

and was surprised to see him in such a "colorful" role and genre! He was always

the opposite to me: rather staid, steady and "he man", lol. I'm looking forward

to seeing *Return of Doctor X* next, with Bogie in that wild get up.

Link to comment
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
 Share

© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...