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

Pray This Does Not Happen On Tuesday 5 November 2013!!!


Recommended Posts

Osborne will obviously try to sound knowledgeable, but chances are very good his so-called commentary will be nothing but inane trivia about such silliness as the fact that every 30s movie star wanted to play Scarlett, and how GWTW was the first movie ever broadcast by TCM.

Real deep commentary about what makes GWTW special and worthy of this tribute will be sadly absent, unless Osborne gets serious!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure Osborne's focus will be on Vivien Leigh in view of her centennial birthday celebration. But he can't talk about how she was the dark horse for the role of Scarlett O'Hara unless he mentions all of the screen tests and the famous candidates for the coveted role. Plus, he only has a couple of minutes on either side of the film. And he has to keep in mind that he's talking to new viewers every day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean ... seriously? PRAY this doesn't happen? How about we pray for world peace or an end to world hunger? You know, RO will say what he'll say and life will go on. You want more in-depth discussion of a film's relevance, there are plenty of sources available. TCM's brief intros/outros don't really lend themselves to a lot of elaboration.

 

Lot of drama queens on this site endlessly bitching about what they don't like about the channel. Kind of wish sometimes they would stop watching and just go away.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this is heresy around here, but personally, I think GWTW is one of the legendary classic movies that hasn't aged well, especially the second half. The business, for example, of Bonnie's death is dragged out forever - sheer melodrama. I also think it is Gable's performance that remains the most convincing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of that backstory stuff is interesting in a way, but isn't needed to enjoy the movie. I'm sure most of us take notice that the giant gates that held back King Kong on Skull Island are somehow in Atlanta when it's burning, and know about the MGM execs letting the backlot burn while shooting stuntmen dressed up as Rhett and Scarlett drive a buggy around. Or the legend of how Vivien Leigh was standing behind a studio suit at the time as he turned around and thought "There's my SCARLETT!" and all that crap.

 

True or not, it doesn't matter. The only fact I'm aware of, outside the cast, is that for some reason, GWTW was the only movie that for years could boast that it was never shown on television. I remember all the re-releases to major theaters Downtown over the years. Big, full page ads in the paper. And that I could never figure out why.

 

Yeah, it's a fantastic movie. Huge and epic and all. But there were before, and after, much better and more epic films made that hit the tube much sooner than WIND.

 

The only "tidbit" I'd be interested in hearing is who made that decision and why?

 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites

>Sepiatone wrote: Yeah, it's a fantastic movie. Huge and epic and all. But there were before, and after, much better and more epic films made that hit the tube much sooner than WIND. The only "tidbit" I'd be interested in hearing is who made that decision and why?

 

 

The likely answer is that whoever owned the film rights believed in Disney's theory of putting classic movies into a vault and then re-releasing them to theaters every decade or so. Remember, "Gone With the Wind" was the all-time box-office champion until "The Sound of Music" briefly displaced it in 1966. A re-release put GWTW back in first place, where it stayed until "The Godfather" moved ahead of it for good in 1972.

 

As it happened, GWTW didn't make it to television until HBO premiered it in June 1976. Five months later, NBC brought it to network television, airing it in two parts. The ratings were huge, which was important during a sweeps month. When you consider that the home videocassette market began to take off a couple of years later, it appears the decision to withhold GWTW from TV until the late 70s was wise and profitable.

 

Edited by: jakeem on Nov 3, 2013 12:07 PM

Link to post
Share on other sites

You will win a lot more friends and a lot more arguments with a less abrasive hostile attitude.

I take movies real seriously, which is why I like to listen to the discussions with people such as Drew Barrymore about what makes a particular movie something special. GWTW won a Best Picture award, so one has to assume it is something special.

As for world peace and world hunger, I leave that to HH the Pope and other influential people, since I myself am currently unemployed and have to concentrate on getting a job in order to move out of the house of my sister, with whom I have to live because I have no income other than food stamps--a very humiliating situation indeed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you. To me GWTW is really overrated. The so called romance between Scarlet and Rhett is just silly immature crap and I see no actual romance there.

 

I do love the performance of Olivia DeHavilland in the film. That was a hard part since the character is just too good to be true (just another example of the cartoonist characters in the book), but Olivia plays it just right.

 

Yes, the production values are first rate but the overall product, not so much.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just once I'd like to see Robert or Ben call out a poster here in one of their intros. Even if it were to make fun of my views on *Member of the Wedding* or *I Want to Live*. I know it'll never happen, but it would be fun to see.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To sewhite: If the OP had said "Hope" instead of "Pray," would you find that acceptable? I don't think we should jump on every word that someone uses.

 

And how many of the subjects discussed on this site are really significant in the larger scheme of things?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this is heresy around here, but personally, I think GWTW is one of the legendary classic movies that hasn't aged well, especially the second half. The business, for example, of Bonnie's death is dragged out forever - sheer melodrama. I also think it is Gable's performance that remains the most convincing.

 

GWTW has always been a shamelessly lying piece of Confederate propaganda in the form of one of the more entertaining and best made films of all time. Contradictions exist everywhere, and this is merely one of them. You just have to suppress everything you know about the reality of slavery for 233 minutes to appreciate the movie on its own terms.

 

Obviously it couldn't happen for quite a few years, but perhaps the best back-to-back pairing that TCM could ever present would be to follow up their 100th showing of GWTW with the TCM premiere of Twelve Years A Slave, with commentary provided by leading historians of the period. Now *that* would be a night to remember.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> You just have to suppress everything you know about the reality of slavery

 

Part of that reality is that there WERE slaves who remained dedicated to their "owners". Not knowing anything else, their loyalty may have been rooted in the fact they had no idea what to expect otherwise. As it turned out, freedom from slavery didn't work out too well for black people for many years. Some would say STILL.

 

The fact remains that since this movie was made 75 years ago, it can only be judged against the standards of those times. And by those standards it was an excellent film. By today's standards, most of the fare on TCM seems quaint, dated and campy. Even the dramas. But taken with consideration of what else there was AT THE TIME, many of those movies were outstanding. And many seem to hold up over time basically due to exceptional performances by the cast, or photography that still looks revelutionary. But everybody's heads were in a far different place, and if you don't get YOUR head in there, your going to overlook the magic.

 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites

*GWTW has always been a shamelessly lying piece of Confederate propaganda in the form of one of the more entertaining and best made films of all time. Contradictions exist everywhere, and this is merely one of them. You just have to suppress everything you know about the reality of slavery for 233 minutes to appreciate the movie on its own terms.*

 

The fact remains that since this movie was made 75 years ago, it can only be judged against the standards of those times. And by those standards it was an excellent film. By today's standards, most of the fare on TCM seems quaint, dated and campy. Even the dramas. But taken with consideration of what else there was AT THE TIME, many of those movies were outstanding. And many seem to hold up over time basically due to exceptional performances by the cast, or photography that still looks revelutionary. But everybody's heads were in a far different place, and if you don't get YOUR head in there, your going to overlook the magic.

 

Curious, but how could you read what I wrote and think that I don't recognize the "magic" of GWTW? Why can't it be both magical *AND* a lying piece of Confederate propaganda at the same time? The "magic" part refers to GWTW's outstanding cinematic qualities, which I fully acknowledge and appreciate, while the "lying" part refers to a depiction of slavery that totally omits any references to the underside of that ignoble institution.

 

And of course those "standards of those times" were the standards of (some, probably most) white folks only, so to call them the "standards of those times" without any qualification kind of begs the question of *whose* standards we're talking about.

 

Look, two of the most beautiful melodies ever composed were used for Deutscheland, Deutscheland Uber Alles and the Soviet National Anthem. Why does everything have to come wrapped in a Neat And Tidy ribbon?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with GWTW has always been the second half. The book being so long, a lot of story had to be condensed and with cutting (What was the rough cut? Something like 6 hours?) it just jumps from one soap opera event to another. I could never stand the actress who played Bonnie, so mourning her was never a big deal to me, though I thought the acting by others was well done. I think in the book (which I read many years ago) Scarlett had several children (before Bonnie and not Rhett's). The film left out a lot of things or just skipped over them......

Link to post
Share on other sites

While I believe GWTW has excellent production values, I don't think the plot is excellent mostly due to the fact the plot is based on a character I find unlikeable; Scarlett, as well as the so called romance between Rhett and her. I find most of the scenes where Scarlett is at the center, which is abour half of the movie, to be mostly just silly soap opera stuff.

 

Therefore the areas of GWTW that I don't like are NOT related to how the movie or book portrays slavery.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As usual, the problem with some discussions is that when you post generalities, people respond with specifics. And when you post specifics, the same people respond with generalities.

 

The "standards" I was referring to were MOVIE MAKING standards. NOT social standards.

 

GWTW never made the claim it was based on pure historical fact, nor a documentary, therefore the "soap opera" schtick works OK because people then were suckers for romantic "slop". This was NOT the only movie back then guilty of it.

 

HOW can it be "Confederate propaganda" when there WAS no Confederacy at the time it was filmed? Propaganda only works when it's CURRENT. The Confederacy was 70+ years gone at the time. I doubt, even in 1939, the movie stirred any sympathy towards the South's situation during the civil war. It all was just a backdrop for the story, which could have taken place at any time.

 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you saying you love Scarlett's character traits or the character Scarlett? E.g. you would want her as a close friend? As as a wife?

 

Ok, I can see one liking the type of selfish, mean, petty, etc.. character she is just like one can like a cad in a movie or even a thief or killer but that is different than liking the actual character traits of said character.

 

While I enjoy many movies where the main character is flawed (even in a major way), the combination of her disagreeable character, along with the 12 year old romantic soap , reduces the quality of the movie.

 

So I rate the movie as good because of it great production values but I don't rate it as one of the best movies Hollywood has ever produced.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I wouldnt want her as a wife and I wouldnt trust her as a friend, but her selfishness and character flaws is what makes her interesting to me. The key to her character is she's a survivor who adapts to what life throws at her. On the other hand, I dont care for Melanie. A moral, kind person to be sure, but boring and a goody goody. Her defense of Scarlett to the end makes me want to shake her. Wake up!

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...