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

Angela Lansbury?!?


Recommended Posts

I think the TCM "Star of the Month" doesn't mean that they select a movie "star" and pay tribute during a given month. I think it means that TCM selects someone in the industry and dubs them TCM's "Star" of the month. There's a difference. Sort of like the old "Queen for a Day."

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Personally, I like Angela Lansbury and consider her a star....

I have always thought the people appearing in films were stars, including the supporting and character actors and actresses.

And, I also think that they should have a "month" highlighting their efforts.

 

Bring on Minerva Urical.....

 

Larry

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was made aware of that, Swithin, when a friend of mine who over the years developed into a militant neocon refused to visit his mother 'cause she was a big fan of "Murder, She Wrote". And that was why! True story.

 

To be clear, I am neither right nor left winger. Our national symbol the great bald eagle has TWO wings, and couldn't fly with only one or the other. 'Nuff said.

 

MY jab was to the efforts of the right-wingers in congress who pushed, whined and weedled to get an airport named after Ronald Reagan, which was accomplished, and Ronnie's face on the ten dollar bill, which wasn't, all long BEFORE he died! So it stands to reason, in light of it, that a right leaning mogul of a movie channel would have insisted Reagan's widow be deemed her own day. No matter HOW much they'd have to fill it in!

 

Personally, I didn't think Nancy was all too terrible an actress. AND was really kinda cute back in the day( and aged gracefully as well). And in spite of my not liking Reagan as president all that much, I did like many of his movies when growing up. Incidentally, I never DID see "Bedtime For Bonzo". Many of his political detractors liked to flame his acting career, calling him a third rate hack. Well, at times it did seem that he and Don DeFore were interchangeable( in fact, I did a joke about that back in his white house days), but still a likeable character up on the screen.

 

Anyway, back to Angela: the idea she be made "Star of the Month" same as "Queen for a Day" just might be right. And why not? Look at those "31 days of Oscar" TCM puts on. Eventually, your gonna run dry. So we get shown movies that only fit in the category because they were NOMINATED for "Best Kraft service" or something. At least with "SOTM", they can keep it new.

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where does it say that you have to be a MAJOR movie star to become TCM's SOTM.? If Angela {whom I enjoy} stirs up this much discussion, what's going to happen when they announce SOTM is Sonny Tufts? B-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sepiatone, you might want to consider that your description of Ted Turner as some sort of right wing wingnut is several decades out of date. How many "right leaning moguls" would have

 

---consisistenly supported a woman's right to choose abortion, at one point calling right-to-lifers "bozos"

 

---spoken out repeatedly on global warming, and against offshore oil drilling and strip mining

 

---spoken out in favor of Obama's health care plan, saying "“We’re the only first world country that doesn’t have universal healthcare and it’s a disgrace"

 

---donated over $1 *BILLION* to United Nations causes

 

---and married *Jane Fonda* ?

 

(Now that last bit may have been due mostly to testosetrone and / or temporary insanity, but it's still hard to imagine any hard core wingnut going *that* far in the service of either of those imperatives)

 

I think you're confusing the old Ted Turner with the one who's been around for the last 20 or 30 years. The truth is that he's one of the not so few public figures who's shed his political rigidity as he's grown older and more exposed to reality, and even if he hadn't produced TCM as his (to us folks here) crowning achievement, he'd still deserve a bit more credit than you're giving him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with you!

 

When someone is selected as SOTM, I don't get into the debates on how bright or how long their star shined or whether they were a leading vs supporting actor. I look at the films being selected and get an idea of what I want to watch.

 

I hope TCM does go down the road of giving actors who never been SOTM the treatment. I also hope character actors get INDIVIDUALIZED attention and not just one month with many films and then the next month a usual suspect is back on the throne.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> Anyway, back to Angela: the idea she be made "Star of the Month" same as "Queen for a Day" just might be right. And why not? Look at those "31 days of Oscar" TCM puts on. *Eventually, your gonna run dry.* So we get shown movies that only fit in the category because they were NOMINATED for "Best Kraft service" or something. At least with "SOTM", they can keep it new.

 

As far as running dry is concerned..... I don't think so.

 

If in twenty to thirty years TCM is still around I would venture to guess that the likes of Harrison Ford, Dustin Hoffman, Morgan Freeman, Al Pacino, John Travolta, Samuel Jackson, Liam Neeson, Ralph Fiennes, Christian Bale, Leonardo DiCaprio, Keanu Reeves, Jodie Foster, Emma Thompson, Anne Hathaway, Tom Hanks, Russell Crowe, Edward Norton, Matt Damon, Annette Bening, Julianne Moore, Michelle Pfeiffer, Helena Bonham Carter, Natalie Portman, Cate Blanchett, Rene Russo, Angelina Jolie, Sandra Bullock, and the list goes on and on...... would be joining the ranks of classic film stars that were from the golden age of movies. It is inevitable.

 

And why is this? Because as it is happening now, TCM IS showing additional newer films alongside the older classics. We have had this argument before and it bears repeating here as well. Any film from any time period can be considered a classic. And if you look at TCM's original mission statement which stated the following.....

 

*Turner Classic Movies presents the greatest movies of all time, from the 1920s through the '80s--featuring the silent screen, International pictures, as well as all of Hollywood's genres--commercial-free, uninterrupted, 24-hours a day.*

 

After its 10th Anniversary in 2004 it amended the statement to include "through the '90s". And I am sure that in 2014, the 20th anniversary of TCM, the statement will be amended again to include the 2000's.

 

The vast majority of films still showing on the channel are from the first half of the 20th century, but more and more recent films have started to sprout up alongside the golden nuggets. The films shown on TCM will always be from the older days of Hollywood, but eventually newer films will be showcased. That has always been the case and will continue to be so.

 

And part of that is the fact that TCM has to show digital versions of the films now, and many of the pre-1960 films have not been converted as of yet. It would be nice if say Gates or Buffet could lend the film preservationist additional money to help create digital transfers of these older films, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.

 

So I think if one was to look through the crystal ball, twenty to thirty years from now, you would still see many of the films from the first half of the 20th Century, along with more current releases. As it is now on average TCM broadcasts about 70% pre-1960 films on the channel. I do not see that changing anytime soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If TCM was to do what you request someone (e.g. director of programming), would have to make choices. Decisions would have to be made. That is what these type of threads are all about. People questioning the wisdom of these choices.

 

There are only 12 months in a year and there are many 'stars'. If second tier stars or character actors are part of the 'master list' (the list of choices), who to include and who NOT to becomes all the more difficult for those having to make the choices. Then we would see related threads posts like 'why him instead this guy ,,'?!?

 

My point??? We that respond to these type of threads have too much free time on our hands! :)

 

As for Angela; I like her but I also agree with many here that say the reason she is SOTM has more to do with her overall as a living acting personality than strictly her status as a film star.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

LoveFilmNoir,

 

I really hope I didn't offend you... I wasn't singling you out or accusing you of anything. I have this condition called Lansbury Fever which causes me to go a little nuts. It seems to be especially strong this month...

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=Bolesroor wrote:}{quote}LoveFilmNoir,

>

> I really hope I didn't offend you... I wasn't singling you out or accusing you of anything. I have this condition called Lansbury Fever which causes me to go a little nuts. It seems to be especially strong this month...

 

 

 

No, not at all! One of the best parts of this board is to respectfully agree to disagree. I understand your fever. I went through the same last January when it was Peter Sellers month and I was quarantined!

Link to post
Share on other sites

First Katharine Hepburn was over-rated, now Angela Lansbury doesn’t deserve to be SOTM ...

 

 

 

And not only is she undeserving, she’s “not a very good actress” ... “was never desirable, never funny, never dramatic or memorable in anything she did” ... "the acting equivalent of a styrofoam peanut," ... and January will be "a month-long tribute to mediocrity."

 

 

 

Clearly, you DON’T LIKE Angela Lansbury. That's your opinion and I respect it as such.

 

 

 

But when opinions are expressed as disrespectful proclamations (“a styrofoam peanut” ?) which contradict facts, it’s fairly inflammatory to some of us who admire Lansbury.

 

 

 

I mean, she DID earn a Best Supporting Actress Oscar nomination for her film debut at age 18 and now, nearly seven decades later, she IS still going strong -- as in: she collected her FIFTH Tony for “Blithe Spirit” in 2009, tying Julie Harris for the most number of competitive Tonys.

 

 

 

In addition, she’s won 6 Golden Globes and was nominated for an Emmy every single year of the 12 years “Murder She Wrote” was on CBS.

 

 

 

That’s hardly the career of an unmemorable actress who was “not very good.”

 

In my opinion, the January SOTM schedule offers viewers – whether Lansbury fans or not – a few rarities, and the only “sad misstep” is that it doesn't include her tour de force performance as an impoverished Countess in the unsung classic “Something For Everyone.”

 

 

 

(I would suggest that adding that film to your screening of “Manchurian Candidate” would make an excellent showcase of Lansbury’s versatility but it hardly seems fair asking you to watch TWO films starring an actress you detest when you’ve already graciously agreed to watch one ;) )

 

 

 

Finally, re: your complaint about commenters here having “a tendency toward trying to explain away dissenting opinions with semantics and veiled insults” ... if this is indeed the case, I respectfully ask you to consider whether the negative tone and content contained in many of your posts might play a part.

 

No offense intended and I hope none taken ... or, as Tallulah once closed a letter:

 

 

 

“P.S.

You know I wouldn’t hurt a fly.

Have I ?”

 

 

 

Tallulah_Enquirer_v4-1.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL... good points, Valeska! Angela Lansbury is indeed a waste of SOTM, and I'm glad you share my disdain for this month's march of mediocrity. I hope Angela is paying you for that bio... I would hate to think there's anyone alive out there whose life actually revolves around that marshmallow from "Murder, She Wrote." That would make me too sad to cry. ;)

 

I admire you for speaking your mind... there are some messageboards on the web where people actually start multiple accounts so that they can hide like cowards when they spew their poison and bile. Clearly these people have been so roundly rejected by society that the internet is their last venue for easing their misery and self-loathing. Luckily we don't have anyone like that here.

 

 

LOL... how red was your face when you were reading my description of the toothless Lansbury? I'm glad I could be your excitement for the week. I feel special. I'm going to watch "Manchurian Candidate" because I respect MovieGal's taste and knowledge of film. I'm sure you understand why I'm not going to watch "Something For Everyone."

 

 

Tootles :^0

Link to post
Share on other sites

What HAS happened to Something for Everyone? I feel like one of the few people to have ever seen that neglected gem. I'm not sure it ever got a DVD release (or if it did, its long out of circulation) I cant remember it ever being shown on tv either (maybe the pay cable stations years ago) It's a shame TCM didnt make the effort to include it (maybe they tried) I know the company that released it (National General) has long been out of business, but someone obviously reissued it for VHS at least. I saw it when it came out and never since! :( (1970 I think.......)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As I noted in my post she is a fine actress and she has criteria to back this up as you mention " she’s won 6 Golden Globes and was nominated for an Emmy every single year of the 12 years “Murder She Wrote” was on CBS".

 

But how many movies does TCM have the rights to where she is the lead female star? Very few. Thus the arguements that she shouldn't be SOTM based on the her classic movies has merit. Again, I have no problem with her being SOTM since I enjoy the movies TCM will be showing.

 

Gloden Globes and Tonys help back up her acting creed but not, per se, that she should be SOTM. As it relates to studio era movies she clearly isn't one of the top stars of the era. Not even close. So to me it is fair to assume TCM has her as SOTM for reasons other than her studio era movies.

 

 

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
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...